UPDATE 2010-06-17: Now AFL gets to have a similar discussion after Mal Brown’s “cannibal” comments.
Still doesn’t if you ask me.
The shorter version is that last Wednesday Andrew Johns, assistant coach of the NSW State of Origin team, made a comment that offended winger Timana Tahu “which he thought was just some banter amongst the boys”. After two restless nights Tahu decided that he had to leave the SOO camp to make a statement about the unacceptability of the remark.
The initial information was that the reasons were “messy” and the implication was that it was for personal reasons. But then Andrew Johns resigned. After that the real reason was always going to come out.
Apparently Johns referred to Greg Inglis as “that black c—-” He was telling centre Beau Scott that his job was to tackle Inglis. As if he wouldn’t know!
Now it seems there may have been more than one racist remark. On the TV tonight he said that there was more than one race mentioned.
I note here that Johns has only been criticised so far for the adjective he used, not the noun. It seems he needs to talk to a few people other than Tahu about what is acceptable. If that’s his idea of acceptable language then he needs a brain.
Timana Tahu has a Maori father and an Aboriginal mother. This story from 2006 sketches a tough life growing up. This one from May this year is even grittier. Tahu’s parents separated and re-partnered making him surplus to requirements. So he experienced life in hostels. In a hostel in Newcastle he first met Greg Inglis, who apparently headed in Queensland’s direction because he might get a better go as an Aboriginal:
Inglis… chose to represent Queensland on the advice of his Brisbane foster parents although he was raised in Bowraville. The decision was based on the widespread belief that Aboriginal athletes were not recognised in NSW as they were in Queensland.
Tahu wonders whether Laurie Daley would have got where he did if he had outed himself as an Aboriginal.
The back page story in the Courier Mail today was under the banner “WHY I’M A MAROON” and included this:
Yesterday his Brisbane mentor, Adrian Coolwell, said Inglis was a Queensland supporter even when he lived in NSW, and when he discovered that 25 per cent or more of Maroon representatives were indigenous he was even more enamoured with his adopted state.
I had of course heard of this issue, for example in relation to the non-selection of Nathan Blacklock, but had no idea whether it was a fact. Tony Currie who did a stint with the Bulldogs was one who weighed in:
”My God there is a feeling about that, it’s not just well known, it’s not just a feeling with the Koori down south, it’s a fact.”
Certainly Queensland has a string of Aboriginal SOO League legends starting with big Artie Beetson. Mal Meninga’s heritage incidentally is South Sea Islander, blackbirded to work on the sugar plantations.
Rugby League has a habit of shooting itself in the foot, and there was a story of a NSW cover-up where the team media manager was told not to answer his phone and which came dangerously close to ‘blame the victim’. BTW I think you’ll find that the author, Andrew Webster, is a senior writer for the (Sydney) Daily Telegraph.
But that could have been a holding operation. When Tahu decided to quit it appears that Johns simply wasn’t there and couldn’t be found. It was a day off and he was away surfing somewhere.
The AFL since Nicky Winmar’s famous gesture in 1993 at least have a process for dealing with racial taunts.
The best that has been offered in this case (from Craig Bellamy) apart from support of the individuals is that Andrew Johns should sit down with Tamaha Tahu and Greg Inglis and talk it out.
When will they ever learn?
Meanwhile it seems for the time being Johns’ job at Channel 9 is safe.
Well.The lack of responses here would seem that this isn’t a good way to expunge racism from its roots.I suspect it is because most of the gentlemen involved are just too fit and muscular to be wearing victim’s guernseys.A few rounds in the ring ,perhaps would show more hurtful possession of ballsiness.
Well.The lack of responses here would seem that this isn’t a good way to expunge racism from its roots.I suspect it is because most of the gentlemen involved are just too fit and muscular to be wearing victim’s guernseys.A few rounds in the ring ,perhaps would show more hurtful possession of ballsiness.
Brian, I think you’re being too tough. The guy not only apologized and said he was wrong and sorry, but also resigned (perhaps he was forced to do that — I guess we’ll never know). What more did you want from him? Sometime or other you have to forgive people for things they say that are stupid, especially if they admit that. Personally, being a minority group myself and teaching 18 year olds, I constantly hear racist stuff that the students obviously don’t realize is racist (and ghastly amounts of homophobic stuff), some of it which includes my group, and some which includes within group racism from other groups (like wogs calling each wogs etc.), so it wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if Johns was being honest in that he was basically unaware of what he was saying.
Brian, I think you’re being too tough. The guy not only apologized and said he was wrong and sorry, but also resigned (perhaps he was forced to do that — I guess we’ll never know). What more did you want from him? Sometime or other you have to forgive people for things they say that are stupid, especially if they admit that. Personally, being a minority group myself and teaching 18 year olds, I constantly hear racist stuff that the students obviously don’t realize is racist (and ghastly amounts of homophobic stuff), some of it which includes my group, and some which includes within group racism from other groups (like wogs calling each wogs etc.), so it wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if Johns was being honest in that he was basically unaware of what he was saying.
Well Conrad, the resignation and apology were well-earned. Could’ve knocked me down with a feather when I heard that rugby player had made racist, misogynist remarks.
I too work around teenagers and hear a fair bit of racist, homophobic and ableist (this is “gay”, this is “lame”) comment. I call them on it. It gets them thinking, which is what they’re at school for, after all.
Well Conrad, the resignation and apology were well-earned. Could’ve knocked me down with a feather when I heard that rugby player had made racist, misogynist remarks.
I too work around teenagers and hear a fair bit of racist, homophobic and ableist (this is “gay”, this is “lame”) comment. I call them on it. It gets them thinking, which is what they’re at school for, after all.
Yes, by all means Conrad, continue to excuse racism with your rhetoric of forgiveness, as is your wont. I note the other players didn’t feel so inclined. Good for them. If no one had ever made a stand against racism by not standing up against it, Conrad, where do you think we might be? Let me tell you something else. Ignorance is not a neutral space which connotes innocence. People are obligated to inform themselves, for many outrages occur in the name of ignorance and many passes are given in its name. And AS IF he didn’t know.
And the players are today saying it’s not one comment. There is a history there of racism against a number of cultures as Brian has noted.
And this post has missed this also – you are forgetting the second half of the insult. You want that women should forgive it too?
I resent Johns and everything he and his miscreant sibling stand for. The both have made a fine display of their misogyny, homophobia and now their racism over these years. They are a national embarrassment. And yet, even so, with every fresh outrage there follows a period of performed attrition only to be rewarded by the commercial broadcasters with their own new shows etc. This is how our culture censures racism, sexism and homophobia – by ignoring it all together.
Yes, by all means Conrad, continue to excuse racism with your rhetoric of forgiveness, as is your wont. I note the other players didn’t feel so inclined. Good for them. If no one had ever made a stand against racism by not standing up against it, Conrad, where do you think we might be? Let me tell you something else. Ignorance is not a neutral space which connotes innocence. People are obligated to inform themselves, for many outrages occur in the name of ignorance and many passes are given in its name. And AS IF he didn’t know.
And the players are today saying it’s not one comment. There is a history there of racism against a number of cultures as Brian has noted.
And this post has missed this also – you are forgetting the second half of the insult. You want that women should forgive it too?
I resent Johns and everything he and his miscreant sibling stand for. The both have made a fine display of their misogyny, homophobia and now their racism over these years. They are a national embarrassment. And yet, even so, with every fresh outrage there follows a period of performed attrition only to be rewarded by the commercial broadcasters with their own new shows etc. This is how our culture censures racism, sexism and homophobia – by ignoring it all together.
Well I just love my own freudian there. I meant “contrition” but “attrition” is really what it is.
Well I just love my own freudian there. I meant “contrition” but “attrition” is really what it is.
This is how our culture censures racism, sexism and homophobia – by ignoring it all together.”
Or in this case, attributing the entirety of fault to Andrew Johns and excoriating him as ‘the problem.’ He’s not. Just crucifying him let’s an entire culture off the hook and simply allows the caravan to move on. As Mercurius suggests, the issue is more about accepted cultural currency than individual deficit.
This is how our culture censures racism, sexism and homophobia – by ignoring it all together.”
Or in this case, attributing the entirety of fault to Andrew Johns and excoriating him as ‘the problem.’ He’s not. Just crucifying him let’s an entire culture off the hook and simply allows the caravan to move on. As Mercurius suggests, the issue is more about accepted cultural currency than individual deficit.
Geoff and Mercurius, Andrew Johns isn’t a teenager, he’s supposed to be an experienced professional. That kind of workplace racism’s a sacking offence for most people, not just trainers.
He’s earned a bit of excoriation, and besides, as we know from when he got caught for pills and drink, he’s quite good at public confession.
Geoff and Mercurius, Andrew Johns isn’t a teenager, he’s supposed to be an experienced professional. That kind of workplace racism’s a sacking offence for most people, not just trainers.
He’s earned a bit of excoriation, and besides, as we know from when he got caught for pills and drink, he’s quite good at public confession.
The Johns brothers are slow learners and as Casey says:
Or at least they ought to be.
The Johns brothers are slow learners and as Casey says:
Or at least they ought to be.
This racism reflects that of our society. For example we have a Labor government demonising refugees and attacking aborigines in the Northern Territory. The fight against racism in Rugby League is part of the fight against racism in society as I argue on my blog. But why is everyone silent on the sexism? That is also a reflection of society’s piorities and the lack of outrage about the noun indicates that sexism is just as ingrained as racism.
This racism reflects that of our society. For example we have a Labor government demonising refugees and attacking aborigines in the Northern Territory. The fight against racism in Rugby League is part of the fight against racism in society as I argue on my blog. But why is everyone silent on the sexism? That is also a reflection of society’s piorities and the lack of outrage about the noun indicates that sexism is just as ingrained as racism.
I agree wholeheartedly with the condemnation of Johns, who should know better having played his entire career with Aboriginal/Polynesian/etc players. However I have a real problem with Brian’s repetition of these offensive suggestions that the NSW selectors discriminate against Aboriginal players. This is one of the usual pre-Origin attempts by Queensland to make NSW look like despicable villains, but this time it has gone from stupid and inane to potentially defamatory, and indeed the Daily Telegraph suggests that the NSW selectors are considering legal action against Mal Meninga, who was the most prominent person to repeat these suggestions. The fact that just this year the panel has selected Jamal Idris, Tom Learoyd-Lahrs and Timana Tahu, who are all proud Aboriginal blokes, surely suggests that the idea that the selectors are racist is nonsense. A handful of prominent Aboriginal players have failed to gain selection, yes, but NSW selections have been completely inexplicable for years (Kurt Gidley’s continuing presence on the team, to take only the most prominent example) so there’s no need to read racial bias into it, especially since one of the selectors is himself Aboriginal. We expect no better from the usual Queensland suspects but it’s a shame that they’ve decided to make personal attacks on the NSW selectors instead of focusing on Andrew Johns.
I agree wholeheartedly with the condemnation of Johns, who should know better having played his entire career with Aboriginal/Polynesian/etc players. However I have a real problem with Brian’s repetition of these offensive suggestions that the NSW selectors discriminate against Aboriginal players. This is one of the usual pre-Origin attempts by Queensland to make NSW look like despicable villains, but this time it has gone from stupid and inane to potentially defamatory, and indeed the Daily Telegraph suggests that the NSW selectors are considering legal action against Mal Meninga, who was the most prominent person to repeat these suggestions. The fact that just this year the panel has selected Jamal Idris, Tom Learoyd-Lahrs and Timana Tahu, who are all proud Aboriginal blokes, surely suggests that the idea that the selectors are racist is nonsense. A handful of prominent Aboriginal players have failed to gain selection, yes, but NSW selections have been completely inexplicable for years (Kurt Gidley’s continuing presence on the team, to take only the most prominent example) so there’s no need to read racial bias into it, especially since one of the selectors is himself Aboriginal. We expect no better from the usual Queensland suspects but it’s a shame that they’ve decided to make personal attacks on the NSW selectors instead of focusing on Andrew Johns.
That is a very good point. If Australian society (and governments) were serious about moving against racism, certain policies and behaviour from the lowest to the highest levels would have to be reexamined.
That is a very good point. If Australian society (and governments) were serious about moving against racism, certain policies and behaviour from the lowest to the highest levels would have to be reexamined.
Brian says exactly what more he wants from him: a little self-education. But I read the post more as about the deficiencies of the various organisations, outfits and infrastructures involved: the League administrators, journalists, Channel Nine and the whole depolorable football subculture in its various manifestations.
Depends who you mean by ‘everyone’. Brian alludes to it indirectly in the post (‘Johns has only been criticised so far for the adjective he used, not the noun. It seems he needs to talk to a few people other than Tahu’) and several commenters here have noted it. I wrote about it yesterday on m’blog and I bet a lot of other women have blogged about it as well.
If you mean the MSM is silent on the sexism, then I would venture a guess that most sports journalists don’t see what the problem is.
Brian says exactly what more he wants from him: a little self-education. But I read the post more as about the deficiencies of the various organisations, outfits and infrastructures involved: the League administrators, journalists, Channel Nine and the whole depolorable football subculture in its various manifestations.
Depends who you mean by ‘everyone’. Brian alludes to it indirectly in the post (‘Johns has only been criticised so far for the adjective he used, not the noun. It seems he needs to talk to a few people other than Tahu’) and several commenters here have noted it. I wrote about it yesterday on m’blog and I bet a lot of other women have blogged about it as well.
If you mean the MSM is silent on the sexism, then I would venture a guess that most sports journalists don’t see what the problem is.
Ahem: ‘deplorable’.
Ahem: ‘deplorable’.
So, is this bloke the other Johns’ brother? I must admit being a Southerner I know nothing about rugby, but at least AFL has got some good protocols when it comes to racism. It has a long way to go when it comes to homophobia, if one can judge from Akermanis’ remarks.
And yes, the ‘cunt’ bit of the remark has gone unheeded. One is not surprised.
So, is this bloke the other Johns’ brother? I must admit being a Southerner I know nothing about rugby, but at least AFL has got some good protocols when it comes to racism. It has a long way to go when it comes to homophobia, if one can judge from Akermanis’ remarks.
And yes, the ‘cunt’ bit of the remark has gone unheeded. One is not surprised.
The reaction is a great indication of why we struggle so hard to expunge racism. We see someone acting with discrimination against a certain arbitrary group, so we attribute such action to the arbitrary group we want that person in.
So what Johns says becomes indicative of Rugby League, or of NSW, or of the working class, or of TV personalities, or just of the Johns family rather than of People Like Us.
No wonder we can’t fight prejudice when we so heartily adopt prejudice as justifications. When this furore is over we can go back to bashing Islam to show case how tolerant we are.
The reaction is a great indication of why we struggle so hard to expunge racism. We see someone acting with discrimination against a certain arbitrary group, so we attribute such action to the arbitrary group we want that person in.
So what Johns says becomes indicative of Rugby League, or of NSW, or of the working class, or of TV personalities, or just of the Johns family rather than of People Like Us.
No wonder we can’t fight prejudice when we so heartily adopt prejudice as justifications. When this furore is over we can go back to bashing Islam to show case how tolerant we are.
conrad @ and BM-dog @ 10, I was trying to keep my opinions out of the post as such beyond nominating Johns as ignorant and brainless and pointing out the misogynist element, which so far no-one in the MSM has done as far as I know. It was a roundup of what has been said.
I’ve just listened to Madonna King on local radio talking to someone whose name I didn’t catch but who spent time with the Tahu family yesterday. He said that the language used by Johns included “nigger”, “black bastard”, “monkey” and “coon”. It’s more than just a slip of the tongue. He also targeted Folau. And you can see why Tahu’s attitude initially was that Johns simply saying sorry just didn’t cut it.
That person also repeated the charge that selections in NSW haven’t given indigenous players a fair go. I have no opinion about that and if once true it may be no longer true. NSW tends to have a range of players with almost identical claims because of the depth that comes with their greater numbers to chose from. So it would be hard to make any discrimination charge stick.
All that Meninga said, as far as I can see, is that indigenous players get a fair go in Qld and that about 25% of selections have been indigenous or other [non-Caucasian] races.
BTW Artie Beetson said that he’s personally always found Johns respectful but this is the 21st century for goodness sake and you just can’t talk like that.
conrad @ and BM-dog @ 10, I was trying to keep my opinions out of the post as such beyond nominating Johns as ignorant and brainless and pointing out the misogynist element, which so far no-one in the MSM has done as far as I know. It was a roundup of what has been said.
I’ve just listened to Madonna King on local radio talking to someone whose name I didn’t catch but who spent time with the Tahu family yesterday. He said that the language used by Johns included “nigger”, “black bastard”, “monkey” and “coon”. It’s more than just a slip of the tongue. He also targeted Folau. And you can see why Tahu’s attitude initially was that Johns simply saying sorry just didn’t cut it.
That person also repeated the charge that selections in NSW haven’t given indigenous players a fair go. I have no opinion about that and if once true it may be no longer true. NSW tends to have a range of players with almost identical claims because of the depth that comes with their greater numbers to chose from. So it would be hard to make any discrimination charge stick.
All that Meninga said, as far as I can see, is that indigenous players get a fair go in Qld and that about 25% of selections have been indigenous or other [non-Caucasian] races.
BTW Artie Beetson said that he’s personally always found Johns respectful but this is the 21st century for goodness sake and you just can’t talk like that.
As a society we are making slow but steady progress on these racial issues, or at least racism in sport issues. Not so long ago, no one would have batted an eyelid at what Johns said. Today, it’s a big deal. Tomorrow, it won’t be said at all.
As a society we are making slow but steady progress on these racial issues, or at least racism in sport issues. Not so long ago, no one would have batted an eyelid at what Johns said. Today, it’s a big deal. Tomorrow, it won’t be said at all.
It appears to me that the NRL enables a broad range of reprehensible behaviours. No doubt many folks are emotionally invested in the game. It is up to them to decide for how long they can tolerate these appalling breaches, signifying their consent by taking out club memberships, attending games, buying merchandise, and contributing to ratings by watching NRL games on television.
On a somewhat related topic, if Karmichael Hunt is among the current RL players most capable of playing AFL, then the NRL should have no concerns about a flood of their players taking up AFL. To be frank, Karmichael Hunt is incapable of playing competitive AFL. If Karmichael Hunt plays more than 20 senior AFL games, I will be very surprised.
It appears to me that the NRL enables a broad range of reprehensible behaviours. No doubt many folks are emotionally invested in the game. It is up to them to decide for how long they can tolerate these appalling breaches, signifying their consent by taking out club memberships, attending games, buying merchandise, and contributing to ratings by watching NRL games on television.
On a somewhat related topic, if Karmichael Hunt is among the current RL players most capable of playing AFL, then the NRL should have no concerns about a flood of their players taking up AFL. To be frank, Karmichael Hunt is incapable of playing competitive AFL. If Karmichael Hunt plays more than 20 senior AFL games, I will be very surprised.
Fine @ 14, Andrew Johns is the younger brother of Matthew Johns. Both grew up in Newcastle and Andrew won a premiership there with Timana Tahu in the team in 2001. Not sure whether Matthew was there or not.
Andrew was arguably the greatest halfback of all time, certainly an outstanding player. He’s been in the wars before over recreational drug use. He admitted using ecstasy on a regular basis throughout his career.
Matthew was involved in a group sex incident for which he lost his job at Channel 9. I don’t follow these ridiculous shows, but I gather he now has his own football show at Channel 7. It’s a fair bet that if Andrew got the chop at Channel 9 he’d surface with a rival channel after an interval.
Fine @ 14, Andrew Johns is the younger brother of Matthew Johns. Both grew up in Newcastle and Andrew won a premiership there with Timana Tahu in the team in 2001. Not sure whether Matthew was there or not.
Andrew was arguably the greatest halfback of all time, certainly an outstanding player. He’s been in the wars before over recreational drug use. He admitted using ecstasy on a regular basis throughout his career.
Matthew was involved in a group sex incident for which he lost his job at Channel 9. I don’t follow these ridiculous shows, but I gather he now has his own football show at Channel 7. It’s a fair bet that if Andrew got the chop at Channel 9 he’d surface with a rival channel after an interval.
I couldn’t help but wonder at how different the news coverage would have been if the incident had involved a top female athlete doing a walkout because a male coach had called her or another team member a c**t. The whole media trivialisation machine would have gone into overdrive to render the athlete as another tedious feminst having a tanty. ‘For heavens sake,’ (as the media script would go) ‘Muslim women get stoned to death for adultery and this silly man-hater gets all upset about an innocuous little noun.’
But then again, women’s sport rarely gets any news coverage anyway. So such an incident probably wouldn’t even be reported.
I couldn’t help but wonder at how different the news coverage would have been if the incident had involved a top female athlete doing a walkout because a male coach had called her or another team member a c**t. The whole media trivialisation machine would have gone into overdrive to render the athlete as another tedious feminst having a tanty. ‘For heavens sake,’ (as the media script would go) ‘Muslim women get stoned to death for adultery and this silly man-hater gets all upset about an innocuous little noun.’
But then again, women’s sport rarely gets any news coverage anyway. So such an incident probably wouldn’t even be reported.
The use of the offending adjective and the offending noun is so retrogressive, as if the circumstances under which they were uttered exists in a bubble immune to the passage of time.
Perhaps the NRL does exist in a time bubble or alternatively perhaps the NRL is a porthole that enables a view of male culture that persists but which is mostly concealed from view by a code of silence.
At the beginning of my sporting days too many decades ago, such language was commonplace. I still coach a football team. I can say with certainty that such language is now extinct in the lexicon of amateur footballers.
The use of the offending adjective and the offending noun is so retrogressive, as if the circumstances under which they were uttered exists in a bubble immune to the passage of time.
Perhaps the NRL does exist in a time bubble or alternatively perhaps the NRL is a porthole that enables a view of male culture that persists but which is mostly concealed from view by a code of silence.
At the beginning of my sporting days too many decades ago, such language was commonplace. I still coach a football team. I can say with certainty that such language is now extinct in the lexicon of amateur footballers.
The Johns brothers are oiks who are representative of deeply entrenched attitudes within their community of origin. I know. I was raised there. They are ‘local heroes’ and every self pitying apology is seen by that community as evidence of their elementary decency. Disgusting. And people wonder why the left bunged on a stink the night Pauline Hanson came to speak – it was to stop One Nation from getting a toehold in the city and the reason it worked is that the good people of Newcastle above all else don’t want trouble in their own backyards. Mind you, they don’t mind sticking it to minorities if they can get away with it.
The Johns brothers are oiks who are representative of deeply entrenched attitudes within their community of origin. I know. I was raised there. They are ‘local heroes’ and every self pitying apology is seen by that community as evidence of their elementary decency. Disgusting. And people wonder why the left bunged on a stink the night Pauline Hanson came to speak – it was to stop One Nation from getting a toehold in the city and the reason it worked is that the good people of Newcastle above all else don’t want trouble in their own backyards. Mind you, they don’t mind sticking it to minorities if they can get away with it.
Brian, I had a look for some mention of it at the websites of the ABC, the Oz, the Age and the SMH this morning. It wasn’t an exhaustive look but it was pretty thorough (a girl’s look, even), and I haven’t seen anything so far.
Also, what iorarua said.
Brian, I had a look for some mention of it at the websites of the ABC, the Oz, the Age and the SMH this morning. It wasn’t an exhaustive look but it was pretty thorough (a girl’s look, even), and I haven’t seen anything so far.
Also, what iorarua said.
Thanks Brian. The Matty Johns stuff was truly disgusting, as I remember it.
Thanks Brian. The Matty Johns stuff was truly disgusting, as I remember it.
Hey, guys, it’s football. Its the way they behave. (remember trhe Rugger-buggers at uni, those of you who went?) They had a substitution of muscle for brain at birth. The only reason any of them are apologising for making racist remarks is to avoid embarrassment in the media. Does anybody think their sincere? Good on the Aborigines and Islanders in the game for taking a stand, but they take stand after stand and it makes no bloody difference. We might think Johns and his ilk are oiks but its the real Australia out there, and its not a nice place. If you don’t believe me talk to some Aborigines. Or women, for that matter.
Hey, guys, it’s football. Its the way they behave. (remember trhe Rugger-buggers at uni, those of you who went?) They had a substitution of muscle for brain at birth. The only reason any of them are apologising for making racist remarks is to avoid embarrassment in the media. Does anybody think their sincere? Good on the Aborigines and Islanders in the game for taking a stand, but they take stand after stand and it makes no bloody difference. We might think Johns and his ilk are oiks but its the real Australia out there, and its not a nice place. If you don’t believe me talk to some Aborigines. Or women, for that matter.
its the real Australia out there
It is a real Australia, but why is it the real Australia? This wide, brown land has many identities. Boof head culture is one of them, so is the ballet.
its the real Australia out there
It is a real Australia, but why is it the real Australia? This wide, brown land has many identities. Boof head culture is one of them, so is the ballet.
Oops … forgot spam filter (please delete previous, Mods):
The bizarre thing Iorarua is that women, in my experience, are rarely if ever called c**ts. I’ve never heard it uttered except by men of other men, and it’s hard to escape the conclusion that it is at least in part, an attempt to diminish men to the status of something to which they bear a mixture of angst, disgust and loss. Then there’s the christian-religious angle as well, which informs so much of contemporary taboo.
Oops … forgot spam filter (please delete previous, Mods):
The bizarre thing Iorarua is that women, in my experience, are rarely if ever called c**ts. I’ve never heard it uttered except by men of other men, and it’s hard to escape the conclusion that it is at least in part, an attempt to diminish men to the status of something to which they bear a mixture of angst, disgust and loss. Then there’s the christian-religious angle as well, which informs so much of contemporary taboo.
I stopped following Rugby League years ago because of the commercialisation of the game, and what I saw as a big loss when the Brisbane league got swallowed up by the ARL, which to me partly reflected the replacement of community/local loyalties and spirit by imperatives drawn from media coverage and the drive to make a buck, which, for me, also affected the way the game was played.
I wonder whether anyone has tried to place this sort of thing in its historical context – I don’t feel I know enough about it now to do so, but there’s been lots of interesting stuff written in sports sociology and history.
I don’t agree with everything she says, but I think Madonna King is right to say that the response to Johns’ appalling remarks should focus the mind of league administrators about what is really wrong with the game:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/15/2926891.htm?site=thedrum
I stopped following Rugby League years ago because of the commercialisation of the game, and what I saw as a big loss when the Brisbane league got swallowed up by the ARL, which to me partly reflected the replacement of community/local loyalties and spirit by imperatives drawn from media coverage and the drive to make a buck, which, for me, also affected the way the game was played.
I wonder whether anyone has tried to place this sort of thing in its historical context – I don’t feel I know enough about it now to do so, but there’s been lots of interesting stuff written in sports sociology and history.
I don’t agree with everything she says, but I think Madonna King is right to say that the response to Johns’ appalling remarks should focus the mind of league administrators about what is really wrong with the game:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/15/2926891.htm?site=thedrum
Hi Fran, I hear women use the ‘c word’ all the time, but almost exclusively when referring to other women – then again I live in country QLD (god help me)
Johns’ remarks are typical of the attitudes displayed in aussie male sporting culture. As someone who excelled in many sports, it’s what I found alienating. I loved the sport but found the culture repellent, and it’s what ultimately led me to abandon my involvement. I’m sure that they’re many blokes in the same boat.
Hi Fran, I hear women use the ‘c word’ all the time, but almost exclusively when referring to other women – then again I live in country QLD (god help me)
Johns’ remarks are typical of the attitudes displayed in aussie male sporting culture. As someone who excelled in many sports, it’s what I found alienating. I loved the sport but found the culture repellent, and it’s what ultimately led me to abandon my involvement. I’m sure that they’re many blokes in the same boat.
Mark,
I don’t know if the following helps re historical context, but it might. From the early 20th century League was seen as as the game for the working class and Union for the silvertails. (A difference that was brought home to me in my yoof when I was briefly living on the upper North Shore in Sydney, and a member of the Union-following family I was living with told me I looked ‘too Western suburbs.’ So, perhaps the behaviour of League players is reflecting a darker side of working class culture?
I don’t know a lot about AFL, but I get the impression it has always, from the very beginning, had a higher contingent of Aboriginal players. Apparently the AFL is similar to a football game Aborigines used to play before the arrival of the Europeans and some sports historians argue the roots of the AFL are in that Indigenous game. Which is perhaps why its more amewnable to dealing with racist incidents.
Anyway, those are my speculations.
Mark,
I don’t know if the following helps re historical context, but it might. From the early 20th century League was seen as as the game for the working class and Union for the silvertails. (A difference that was brought home to me in my yoof when I was briefly living on the upper North Shore in Sydney, and a member of the Union-following family I was living with told me I looked ‘too Western suburbs.’ So, perhaps the behaviour of League players is reflecting a darker side of working class culture?
I don’t know a lot about AFL, but I get the impression it has always, from the very beginning, had a higher contingent of Aboriginal players. Apparently the AFL is similar to a football game Aborigines used to play before the arrival of the Europeans and some sports historians argue the roots of the AFL are in that Indigenous game. Which is perhaps why its more amewnable to dealing with racist incidents.
Anyway, those are my speculations.
Disappointing if true, Alex. I won’t tolerate that term within earshot and likewise terms like sl*t and b*tch (when it refers to women rather than dogs) are out as well. It is always an occasion for an impromptu class/playground discussion for why these terms are unacceptable.
Disappointing if true, Alex. I won’t tolerate that term within earshot and likewise terms like sl*t and b*tch (when it refers to women rather than dogs) are out as well. It is always an occasion for an impromptu class/playground discussion for why these terms are unacceptable.
Mark, that column from Madonna King was pretty much on the Mark, except that she didn’t pick up in the misogyny aspect either.
That point about community/local loyalties giving away to commercial values is tricky IMO. The Broncos are a commercial venture, but operating as as the only team in town they tap into and cultivate community loyalties as well. Also they have cultivated female participation which is evident in their marketing, design of clothes etc and is part of why the management had a very low tolerance for such things as Karmichael Hunt’s exploits in toilets last year.
So the commercial enterprises try to embed themselves in the community, and loyalty is not dead by any means.
At the same time League has been conscious that they are in the entertainment business and hence have been more willing to change the rules than Union in order to provide a watchable spectacle.
But to make the game marketable they have to be very careful not to infringe community norms and seem to have found it difficult to expunge noxious elements of the culture.
Anthony N @ 22 is no doubt right about Newcastle. Jimmy Maher, captain of the first Qld team that won the Sheffield Shield and ex Cairns, ran into similar trouble with a joke that ran too easily from the tongue and was offensive to indigenous Australians.
Mark, that column from Madonna King was pretty much on the Mark, except that she didn’t pick up in the misogyny aspect either.
That point about community/local loyalties giving away to commercial values is tricky IMO. The Broncos are a commercial venture, but operating as as the only team in town they tap into and cultivate community loyalties as well. Also they have cultivated female participation which is evident in their marketing, design of clothes etc and is part of why the management had a very low tolerance for such things as Karmichael Hunt’s exploits in toilets last year.
So the commercial enterprises try to embed themselves in the community, and loyalty is not dead by any means.
At the same time League has been conscious that they are in the entertainment business and hence have been more willing to change the rules than Union in order to provide a watchable spectacle.
But to make the game marketable they have to be very careful not to infringe community norms and seem to have found it difficult to expunge noxious elements of the culture.
Anthony N @ 22 is no doubt right about Newcastle. Jimmy Maher, captain of the first Qld team that won the Sheffield Shield and ex Cairns, ran into similar trouble with a joke that ran too easily from the tongue and was offensive to indigenous Australians.
Speculating about language. (And I’m doing this without checking any of the books on my shelf, so apologies for any errors.)
From 1788 onwards, there was a language divide between the ruling/administrative class and, to use the coreect 18C terminology, ‘the lower orders’, so much so that Watkin Tench found the convict argot unintelligible. Convict language came mainly from the London underworld (though not exclusively) and the London working class. As the colony developed some words used by the working class developed into common usage. A good example of how these words were popularised later in the late19C/early 20C is found in the work of C. J Dennis.
Most swear words (eg c**t, fuck, bloody, bugger etc) seem to have their origins way back in the mists of time [bloody is medieval] )and were transposed here with the earliest European settlers. Perhaps they have such a prominence in our culture because of its convict origins.(And they probablt reflect changing attitudes to sexuality and women.)
Racist terms are something different again. One finds very few of them in earliest surviving Euopean documents, but that doesn’t mean they weren’t transmitted orally from the very beginning. Certainly English settlers used them in early America, in relation to both Afro- and Native Americans. Here in Australia I would speculate the racially abusive words describing Indigenous people arose out of frontier conflict, but were opoularised, along with anti-Asian epiteths probably from the time of the gold-rushes onwards. Since the make up of gold-miners was across all classes, I would speculate (and its speculation only) that this was probably the period were the obscure convict cant made its major cross-over in all reaches of society. Don’t knbow if that answers parts of your query, though, Mark.
The difficult quesation is
Speculating about language. (And I’m doing this without checking any of the books on my shelf, so apologies for any errors.)
From 1788 onwards, there was a language divide between the ruling/administrative class and, to use the coreect 18C terminology, ‘the lower orders’, so much so that Watkin Tench found the convict argot unintelligible. Convict language came mainly from the London underworld (though not exclusively) and the London working class. As the colony developed some words used by the working class developed into common usage. A good example of how these words were popularised later in the late19C/early 20C is found in the work of C. J Dennis.
Most swear words (eg c**t, fuck, bloody, bugger etc) seem to have their origins way back in the mists of time [bloody is medieval] )and were transposed here with the earliest European settlers. Perhaps they have such a prominence in our culture because of its convict origins.(And they probablt reflect changing attitudes to sexuality and women.)
Racist terms are something different again. One finds very few of them in earliest surviving Euopean documents, but that doesn’t mean they weren’t transmitted orally from the very beginning. Certainly English settlers used them in early America, in relation to both Afro- and Native Americans. Here in Australia I would speculate the racially abusive words describing Indigenous people arose out of frontier conflict, but were opoularised, along with anti-Asian epiteths probably from the time of the gold-rushes onwards. Since the make up of gold-miners was across all classes, I would speculate (and its speculation only) that this was probably the period were the obscure convict cant made its major cross-over in all reaches of society. Don’t knbow if that answers parts of your query, though, Mark.
The difficult quesation is
Just on the matter of what Meninga was supposed to have said, the NSW selectors have certainly taken offence.
I don’t think you could doubt the integrity of said gentlemen. This supposed issue gained a lot of oxygen when Anthony Mundine reckoned he deserved a walk up start and didn’t get it. As I recall there were some very good candidates ahead of him. He’s at it again, calling for an Aboriginal boycott of SOO. I tend not to take much notice of anything he says. Other than that the only ones alleging NSW selection bias have been Tony Currie and the family Greg Inglis stayed with when playing in Brisbane.
This is the most complete account I can find of what Meninga said. He was obviously asked questions by Channel Nine, but as far as I can see restricted himself to what Qld do rather than saying anything about NSW. If NSW want to donate money to the bank accounts of lawyers, then good luck to them.
Both sides tend to get a bit aerated about the other side. The QRL is underwhelmed by Geoff Carr’s public statements on the Israel Folau selection and are lining up their lawyers if he wants to do anything about it.
BTW the CM identified 28 Qld indigenous selections, or 16.6%. The figures for NSW are 18 and 7.8%. The Qld list includes Meninga who is actually Melanesian. It doesn’t include Adrian Lam who was, I think, PNG.
The figure of 25-27% I think may refer to all coloured ethnicities in the NRL, not Qld in particular.
Just on the matter of what Meninga was supposed to have said, the NSW selectors have certainly taken offence.
I don’t think you could doubt the integrity of said gentlemen. This supposed issue gained a lot of oxygen when Anthony Mundine reckoned he deserved a walk up start and didn’t get it. As I recall there were some very good candidates ahead of him. He’s at it again, calling for an Aboriginal boycott of SOO. I tend not to take much notice of anything he says. Other than that the only ones alleging NSW selection bias have been Tony Currie and the family Greg Inglis stayed with when playing in Brisbane.
This is the most complete account I can find of what Meninga said. He was obviously asked questions by Channel Nine, but as far as I can see restricted himself to what Qld do rather than saying anything about NSW. If NSW want to donate money to the bank accounts of lawyers, then good luck to them.
Both sides tend to get a bit aerated about the other side. The QRL is underwhelmed by Geoff Carr’s public statements on the Israel Folau selection and are lining up their lawyers if he wants to do anything about it.
BTW the CM identified 28 Qld indigenous selections, or 16.6%. The figures for NSW are 18 and 7.8%. The Qld list includes Meninga who is actually Melanesian. It doesn’t include Adrian Lam who was, I think, PNG.
The figure of 25-27% I think may refer to all coloured ethnicities in the NRL, not Qld in particular.
“b*tch (when it refers to women rather than dogs)”
Butch?
“b*tch (when it refers to women rather than dogs)”
Butch?
Unfortunately, not true. Aborigines played in numbers only since the mid-1970s.
There were a few before that. Individual teams in the VFL had different attitudes to Aborigines. Doug Nichols, the eventual Governor of SA, suffered exclusionist behaviour at Carlton FC but was welcomed to Fitzroy FC.
Polly Farmer, one of the greatest players in the game, captained and then coached Geelong. His aboriginality was hardly ever mentioned during his playing and coaching career. His greatness was accompanied by and perhaps necessitated the suppression of his aboriginality.
Unfortunately, not true. Aborigines played in numbers only since the mid-1970s.
There were a few before that. Individual teams in the VFL had different attitudes to Aborigines. Doug Nichols, the eventual Governor of SA, suffered exclusionist behaviour at Carlton FC but was welcomed to Fitzroy FC.
Polly Farmer, one of the greatest players in the game, captained and then coached Geelong. His aboriginality was hardly ever mentioned during his playing and coaching career. His greatness was accompanied by and perhaps necessitated the suppression of his aboriginality.
Anyone wanting an academic read on Aborigines in sport could hunt down the work of Colin Tatz, (retired) Macq. U academic whose research was ground breaking. Some publications available online.
Anyone wanting an academic read on Aborigines in sport could hunt down the work of Colin Tatz, (retired) Macq. U academic whose research was ground breaking. Some publications available online.
After being called a white c**t numerous times over the last ten years while playing rugby league against teams made up of predominately indigenous players, let’s not pretend this is just a white thing.
Also, what if Johns had said a fat c**t instead? Why is that not worthy of all of this drama? I would imagine obese people are often discriminated against.
What about last year when Thurston called Gidley a spastic? If Gidley had a disabled relative should he have taken the matter further?
Why couldn’t Tahu have said to Johns that he finds the language offensive and doesn’t want to hear it?
It just seems over the top that he would leave his team mates when they most need him, because of something an assistant coach says about an opposing player. Why didn’t he stay and try and sort it out?
I know this is against the line of the blog but it is a common view but one that inn’t allowed to be articulated in our mainstream press at the moment.
After being called a white c**t numerous times over the last ten years while playing rugby league against teams made up of predominately indigenous players, let’s not pretend this is just a white thing.
Also, what if Johns had said a fat c**t instead? Why is that not worthy of all of this drama? I would imagine obese people are often discriminated against.
What about last year when Thurston called Gidley a spastic? If Gidley had a disabled relative should he have taken the matter further?
Why couldn’t Tahu have said to Johns that he finds the language offensive and doesn’t want to hear it?
It just seems over the top that he would leave his team mates when they most need him, because of something an assistant coach says about an opposing player. Why didn’t he stay and try and sort it out?
I know this is against the line of the blog but it is a common view but one that inn’t allowed to be articulated in our mainstream press at the moment.
Sam … look at your keyboard character “u” and execute this action:
it’s just a jump to the right
Sam … look at your keyboard character “u” and execute this action:
it’s just a jump to the right
1) Whenever someone like Andrew Johns says something like he has, you know Anthony Mundine is standing by, ready to cash in. Usually is a News Ltd publication.
2) When Andrew Johns first came on the scene, there were very few, if any, Aboriginals or Polynesians in the Knights team. Contrast that with the side that took the field last weekend. Perhaps Andrew, while all the other things were going on his life like drug and alcohol abuse and assorted family dramas, did not notice the change that has come over the make-up of his former team. Or the makeup of every team that he ever played against.
3) When Andrew Johns was the king of Newcastle, the locals referred to them as the Knightmares. Ask any publican in the Merewether/Glebe Road/Hamilton area. He didn’t manage this by himself.
4) While the Knightmares were in play, there were equivalants in every other NRL and ARL team. It never really goes away.
5) Just because Queensland picks more Aboriginals than NSW or that Greg Ingils’ foster parents think there is less racism up north doesn’t really make any difference. Last time I checked, Cherbourg and Palm Island were still part of Queensland.
1) Whenever someone like Andrew Johns says something like he has, you know Anthony Mundine is standing by, ready to cash in. Usually is a News Ltd publication.
2) When Andrew Johns first came on the scene, there were very few, if any, Aboriginals or Polynesians in the Knights team. Contrast that with the side that took the field last weekend. Perhaps Andrew, while all the other things were going on his life like drug and alcohol abuse and assorted family dramas, did not notice the change that has come over the make-up of his former team. Or the makeup of every team that he ever played against.
3) When Andrew Johns was the king of Newcastle, the locals referred to them as the Knightmares. Ask any publican in the Merewether/Glebe Road/Hamilton area. He didn’t manage this by himself.
4) While the Knightmares were in play, there were equivalants in every other NRL and ARL team. It never really goes away.
5) Just because Queensland picks more Aboriginals than NSW or that Greg Ingils’ foster parents think there is less racism up north doesn’t really make any difference. Last time I checked, Cherbourg and Palm Island were still part of Queensland.
“The bizarre thing Iorarua is that women, in my experience, are rarely if ever called c**ts. I’ve never heard it uttered except by men of other men, and it’s hard to escape the conclusion that it is at least in part, an attempt to diminish men to the status of something to which they bear a mixture of angst, disgust and loss. Then there’s the christian-religious angle as well, which informs so much of contemporary taboo.”
Then you need to spend more time in company that isn’t white and middle class. In some communities its pretty commonplace to hear girls using the term toward others, including other females.
“The bizarre thing Iorarua is that women, in my experience, are rarely if ever called c**ts. I’ve never heard it uttered except by men of other men, and it’s hard to escape the conclusion that it is at least in part, an attempt to diminish men to the status of something to which they bear a mixture of angst, disgust and loss. Then there’s the christian-religious angle as well, which informs so much of contemporary taboo.”
Then you need to spend more time in company that isn’t white and middle class. In some communities its pretty commonplace to hear girls using the term toward others, including other females.
Marlin @ 38, this is Bellamy’s initial take. I heard Bellamy say that Tahu was simply too upset. Remember there was more than just one phrase and Tahu had been stewing over it for two days and two restless nights.
I think we need to respect how he felt and what he thought it appropriate to do at the time. Had he stayed it’s unlikely he would have been able to give the game the effort it deserves.
Marlin @ 38, this is Bellamy’s initial take. I heard Bellamy say that Tahu was simply too upset. Remember there was more than just one phrase and Tahu had been stewing over it for two days and two restless nights.
I think we need to respect how he felt and what he thought it appropriate to do at the time. Had he stayed it’s unlikely he would have been able to give the game the effort it deserves.
Yes Geoff Honor the culture needs looking at, for sure. I had just such a discussion with Catharine Lumby about it on The Punch site once regarding the other Johns and the comments of rugby league officials which all but exempted the sexual abuse (Im not calling it group sex – that denotes consent) of a young woman in New Zealand.
Yet the Johns brothers too in their own right deserve condemnation. A fairly well known blogger who hales from Newcastle once put up a long and detailed post on his experiences as a gay teenager at the hands of the Johns brothers. They went to the same school. It made for harrowing reading. And since those days, it seems that with every depredation they have more and more honours conferred upon them by way of prime time TV gigs. But first, there are the obligatory carefully orchestrated, scripted and low lit “forgiveness and redemption” pieces for public consumption. Then the carefully planned and plotted returns to prime time, in due course. Of course, Channel 9 and 7, and the Johns bros minders think we are as cretinous as their product.
But I don’t believe this is the real Australia, as if there is only one. It’s just that this one space here needs the scrutiny that the group of players who have no longer stood for it, bring. More power to them x 2.
But I always see this – racism will shift before sexism does. As noted here, the little coverage given to the misogyny of the statement is telling. But sorry Brian I see you did indeed allude to the second part of the insult and thank you for it.
Yes Geoff Honor the culture needs looking at, for sure. I had just such a discussion with Catharine Lumby about it on The Punch site once regarding the other Johns and the comments of rugby league officials which all but exempted the sexual abuse (Im not calling it group sex – that denotes consent) of a young woman in New Zealand.
Yet the Johns brothers too in their own right deserve condemnation. A fairly well known blogger who hales from Newcastle once put up a long and detailed post on his experiences as a gay teenager at the hands of the Johns brothers. They went to the same school. It made for harrowing reading. And since those days, it seems that with every depredation they have more and more honours conferred upon them by way of prime time TV gigs. But first, there are the obligatory carefully orchestrated, scripted and low lit “forgiveness and redemption” pieces for public consumption. Then the carefully planned and plotted returns to prime time, in due course. Of course, Channel 9 and 7, and the Johns bros minders think we are as cretinous as their product.
But I don’t believe this is the real Australia, as if there is only one. It’s just that this one space here needs the scrutiny that the group of players who have no longer stood for it, bring. More power to them x 2.
But I always see this – racism will shift before sexism does. As noted here, the little coverage given to the misogyny of the statement is telling. But sorry Brian I see you did indeed allude to the second part of the insult and thank you for it.
Discussion here seems to be being conducted in something of a rarified atmosphere. If people are interested in what the attitudes of the rubgy league public is to this matter, I suggest a visit to the “Daily Telegraph” site to read the readers’ comments in response to the articles on this matter. Although it may not be in the majority, there is a strong consensus running against Tahu, suggesting that it’s time he toughened up. This issue is not really going to be resolved, particularly given that rugby league opinion makers are moving to create an atmosphere in which Johns will be excused for a slip-of-the-tongue, a throwaway comment.
Discussion here seems to be being conducted in something of a rarified atmosphere. If people are interested in what the attitudes of the rubgy league public is to this matter, I suggest a visit to the “Daily Telegraph” site to read the readers’ comments in response to the articles on this matter. Although it may not be in the majority, there is a strong consensus running against Tahu, suggesting that it’s time he toughened up. This issue is not really going to be resolved, particularly given that rugby league opinion makers are moving to create an atmosphere in which Johns will be excused for a slip-of-the-tongue, a throwaway comment.
Yes, Wood Duck, we’re quite aware of the Tele and the Herald Sun and all those other places where the consensus is that women, people of colour, disabled etc should just harden the f**k up and allow the bullies of society walk all over them as always. Some of us here have a different view. You’re welcome to the Tele comments threads if you find them congenial.
Yes, Wood Duck, we’re quite aware of the Tele and the Herald Sun and all those other places where the consensus is that women, people of colour, disabled etc should just harden the f**k up and allow the bullies of society walk all over them as always. Some of us here have a different view. You’re welcome to the Tele comments threads if you find them congenial.
What is it with people who claim they’re “not allowed” to express support for people like Johns, just because some people exercise *their* right of free speech to criticise him (and his lovely brother)? Will only complete silence and acquiescence satisfy these people? See “bullies”, above, also, the point I made just before about this “common view” which “isn’t allowed to be articulated” being all over the tabloids, and doubtless numerous personal blogs and talkback as well. Please, spare me the faux-victimhood.
What is it with people who claim they’re “not allowed” to express support for people like Johns, just because some people exercise *their* right of free speech to criticise him (and his lovely brother)? Will only complete silence and acquiescence satisfy these people? See “bullies”, above, also, the point I made just before about this “common view” which “isn’t allowed to be articulated” being all over the tabloids, and doubtless numerous personal blogs and talkback as well. Please, spare me the faux-victimhood.
Yes, I find it odd that ‘harden the f***k up’ means allow yourself to be humiliated and bullied. I think it’s much braver, much ‘harder’ if you will, to walk away.
Of course, some people think that way and I don’t need to read Daily Tele blogs to work that one out.
Conrad, why should he stay, when his teammates most need him, if this is the way his teammates chose to treat him, or allow him to be treated? They should have manned up and walked out with him.
Yes, I find it odd that ‘harden the f***k up’ means allow yourself to be humiliated and bullied. I think it’s much braver, much ‘harder’ if you will, to walk away.
Of course, some people think that way and I don’t need to read Daily Tele blogs to work that one out.
Conrad, why should he stay, when his teammates most need him, if this is the way his teammates chose to treat him, or allow him to be treated? They should have manned up and walked out with him.
Sublime said:
Well as a matter of fact, much of my teaching career has been spent in the SW suburbs of Sydney — places like Airds, Minto, Birrong, Narwee and Canterbury. The ethnic mix there is mostly non Anglo-Celt and substantially Arab, S E Asian and Pacific Islander and very definitely not middle class.
Sublime said:
Well as a matter of fact, much of my teaching career has been spent in the SW suburbs of Sydney — places like Airds, Minto, Birrong, Narwee and Canterbury. The ethnic mix there is mostly non Anglo-Celt and substantially Arab, S E Asian and Pacific Islander and very definitely not middle class.
Using c**t as an insult says a lot about the insulter’s view of women, and sex too – none of them good.
But yet we’re much more tolerant of calling someone a prick (see what I mean – I don’t even have to use asterisks for it). Culture’s a funny thing.
Using c**t as an insult says a lot about the insulter’s view of women, and sex too – none of them good.
But yet we’re much more tolerant of calling someone a prick (see what I mean – I don’t even have to use asterisks for it). Culture’s a funny thing.
I don’t disagree with your substantive point DD, but for consistency’s sake, I always respond the same way when that term is used. I’ve even pulled up fellow staff for using “spaz” which, though not often connected with cerebral palsy by those carelessly tossing it about, remains a term of abuse.
I don’t disagree with your substantive point DD, but for consistency’s sake, I always respond the same way when that term is used. I’ve even pulled up fellow staff for using “spaz” which, though not often connected with cerebral palsy by those carelessly tossing it about, remains a term of abuse.
The response from some quarters about Tahu’s actions speaks volumes for his courage in taking the course of action that he did. He would have known that would be a likely outcome. I have certainly been in situations where I found it easier to leave a club or (unwisely) put myself under considerable stress because of prevailing misogyny or racism or a bullying culture within a team.
I see no reason why Tahu should have stayed quiet beyond the unedifying one of protecting people from being called on their unacceptable behavior and the tacit support that Johns thought that he had to make such remarks.
The response from some quarters about Tahu’s actions speaks volumes for his courage in taking the course of action that he did. He would have known that would be a likely outcome. I have certainly been in situations where I found it easier to leave a club or (unwisely) put myself under considerable stress because of prevailing misogyny or racism or a bullying culture within a team.
I see no reason why Tahu should have stayed quiet beyond the unedifying one of protecting people from being called on their unacceptable behavior and the tacit support that Johns thought that he had to make such remarks.
Yeah, fair point Brian at 42.
I said that my view wasn’t getting aired but Helen at 46 said that it is being said in the Telegraph’s comments thread. I probably had in mind that none of the rugby league writers or sports presenters were saying he could have stayed and confronted Johns about the comments rather than walking out on the team. I didn’t say I wasn’t allowed to voice my opinion, I said that my view wasn’t being articulated in the mainstream press. I still think that’s right.
Yeah, fair point Brian at 42.
I said that my view wasn’t getting aired but Helen at 46 said that it is being said in the Telegraph’s comments thread. I probably had in mind that none of the rugby league writers or sports presenters were saying he could have stayed and confronted Johns about the comments rather than walking out on the team. I didn’t say I wasn’t allowed to voice my opinion, I said that my view wasn’t being articulated in the mainstream press. I still think that’s right.
Sublime said:
Then you need to spend more time in company that isn’t white and middle class.
Well as a matter of fact, much of my teaching career has been spent in the SW suburbs of Sydney — places like Airds, Minto, Birrong, Narwee and Canterbury. The ethnic mix there is mostly non Anglo-Celt and substantially Arab, S E Asian and Pacific Islander and very definitely not middle class.
Look i take your point about gender/misogyny around the ‘c’ word, I’m just surprised you’ve never heard a female being called a ‘c**t’. Granted on one level it sounds bizarre, as society generally perceives words such as bast*rd, m*therf*ck*r and b*tch as gender specific, but there are many examples where people who are abused take on the words, and actions, of the oppressors. Where that intersects with illiteracy and generally poor cultural capital, you will witness all sorts of such incongruities. It gets interesting when those words and actions take on meaning and agency in themselves; being appropriated and reconstructed to some extent . (The simplest example being the use of the word n*gger in Australia, but i could give you many many more.)
Sublime said:
Then you need to spend more time in company that isn’t white and middle class.
Well as a matter of fact, much of my teaching career has been spent in the SW suburbs of Sydney — places like Airds, Minto, Birrong, Narwee and Canterbury. The ethnic mix there is mostly non Anglo-Celt and substantially Arab, S E Asian and Pacific Islander and very definitely not middle class.
Look i take your point about gender/misogyny around the ‘c’ word, I’m just surprised you’ve never heard a female being called a ‘c**t’. Granted on one level it sounds bizarre, as society generally perceives words such as bast*rd, m*therf*ck*r and b*tch as gender specific, but there are many examples where people who are abused take on the words, and actions, of the oppressors. Where that intersects with illiteracy and generally poor cultural capital, you will witness all sorts of such incongruities. It gets interesting when those words and actions take on meaning and agency in themselves; being appropriated and reconstructed to some extent . (The simplest example being the use of the word n*gger in Australia, but i could give you many many more.)
Marlin, Gordon Tallis said he would have fronted Johns, but he respected Tahu’s right to do it his way.
Wood Duck @ 44, have a look at this comments thread in the Courier Mail. It’s predominately supporting Tahu and condemning Johns. Some like Artie Beetson supported Johns the person while condemning what he said. Steve Renouf says excise him from the game. He’s got a column with the Daily Telegraph and coaching consultancies with several teams, including Tahu’s team at Parramatta, as well as his TV gig.
Casey @ 43, the story about the gay teenager and the Johns brothers is instructive. I don’t think Andrew Johns’ commentary is all that insightful. The game wouldn’t lose anything if he just disappeared.
Marlin, Gordon Tallis said he would have fronted Johns, but he respected Tahu’s right to do it his way.
Wood Duck @ 44, have a look at this comments thread in the Courier Mail. It’s predominately supporting Tahu and condemning Johns. Some like Artie Beetson supported Johns the person while condemning what he said. Steve Renouf says excise him from the game. He’s got a column with the Daily Telegraph and coaching consultancies with several teams, including Tahu’s team at Parramatta, as well as his TV gig.
Casey @ 43, the story about the gay teenager and the Johns brothers is instructive. I don’t think Andrew Johns’ commentary is all that insightful. The game wouldn’t lose anything if he just disappeared.
sc @ 53, when at university about a hundred years ago I remember being told about a German word the meaning of which went from virgin to prostitute and all the way back again over the centuries.
In my youf I think words like the “c” word were used in a manner dissociated from their semantic meaning until we had the benefit of some consciousness raising from the 1960s. Could be wrong, it was a long time ago.
Such consciousness raising might have missed the Johns boys in Newcastle.
But Tahu said it went beyond one race and when you consider “nigger”, “black bastard”, “monkey” and “coon”, as well as “black c—” when you have Tahu, Jarryd Hayne and Tom Learoyd-Lahrs in the team, well it boggles the mind in terms of sheer stupidity if nothing else.
sc @ 53, when at university about a hundred years ago I remember being told about a German word the meaning of which went from virgin to prostitute and all the way back again over the centuries.
In my youf I think words like the “c” word were used in a manner dissociated from their semantic meaning until we had the benefit of some consciousness raising from the 1960s. Could be wrong, it was a long time ago.
Such consciousness raising might have missed the Johns boys in Newcastle.
But Tahu said it went beyond one race and when you consider “nigger”, “black bastard”, “monkey” and “coon”, as well as “black c—” when you have Tahu, Jarryd Hayne and Tom Learoyd-Lahrs in the team, well it boggles the mind in terms of sheer stupidity if nothing else.
I think sometimes the c-word has begun to be used in our language, especially amongst young people, as a substitute slang word for “person” or “guy.” I think often when people – particularly young men – say the word they aren’t connecting it to the thing that it actually is or any of the misogynist reasons it might be wrong. In many instances they’re literally replacing the word “man” with a rough slang word they see as meaning “man.” I think those same men will happily use the word as an insult, in the form “you’re a c***” but they aren’t making any such connections when they use it in the form “that c*** over there.”
I noticed this when I was teaching kickboxing, that a lot of my younger, less educated male (and sometimes female) students would speak this way, as in “he’s a tough c***” or “no-one can take down that c***,” often about someone they quite respect individually.
This doesn’t make the word any better or worse, of course, or its usage more or less acceptable. I don’t think it even constitutes a defense of ignorance, but I do think that some people have intentionally different uses of the word in different contexts. I’ve certainly heard sportsmen use it in the way Johns did (e.g. “you’ve got to hit that [adjective] c*** hard if you want to win”) in a kind of respectful way, like if they had said “guy” or “man” it wouldn’t give the same emphasis of superior strength/skill/etc.
I think it should be reserved for the body part it describes, a la Ursula le Guin.
I think sometimes the c-word has begun to be used in our language, especially amongst young people, as a substitute slang word for “person” or “guy.” I think often when people – particularly young men – say the word they aren’t connecting it to the thing that it actually is or any of the misogynist reasons it might be wrong. In many instances they’re literally replacing the word “man” with a rough slang word they see as meaning “man.” I think those same men will happily use the word as an insult, in the form “you’re a c***” but they aren’t making any such connections when they use it in the form “that c*** over there.”
I noticed this when I was teaching kickboxing, that a lot of my younger, less educated male (and sometimes female) students would speak this way, as in “he’s a tough c***” or “no-one can take down that c***,” often about someone they quite respect individually.
This doesn’t make the word any better or worse, of course, or its usage more or less acceptable. I don’t think it even constitutes a defense of ignorance, but I do think that some people have intentionally different uses of the word in different contexts. I’ve certainly heard sportsmen use it in the way Johns did (e.g. “you’ve got to hit that [adjective] c*** hard if you want to win”) in a kind of respectful way, like if they had said “guy” or “man” it wouldn’t give the same emphasis of superior strength/skill/etc.
I think it should be reserved for the body part it describes, a la Ursula le Guin.
No argument with me Brian
If i was Tahu i would have definitely walked out, though I imagine that it wasn’t just the words in themselves, but that they were symptomatic of a broader attitude.
No argument with me Brian
If i was Tahu i would have definitely walked out, though I imagine that it wasn’t just the words in themselves, but that they were symptomatic of a broader attitude.
It just seems over the top that he would leave his team mates when they most need him,
See, it seems over the top – to me – that he would tolerate an atmosphere of endemic and casual racism for the sake of nothing more than a game. Horses for courses I suppose.
It just seems over the top that he would leave his team mates when they most need him,
See, it seems over the top – to me – that he would tolerate an atmosphere of endemic and casual racism for the sake of nothing more than a game. Horses for courses I suppose.
I take your point patrickg at 58 but I don’t know if it was an “atmosphere” if Tahu said that it was only Johns who was the person making the remarks. Maybe it was an atmosphere becasue no-one told Johns to shut his mouth, but Tahu didn’t tell him to shut up either. Neither did Hayne or Learoyd who may or may not have heard Johns use that sort of language.
I take your point patrickg at 58 but I don’t know if it was an “atmosphere” if Tahu said that it was only Johns who was the person making the remarks. Maybe it was an atmosphere becasue no-one told Johns to shut his mouth, but Tahu didn’t tell him to shut up either. Neither did Hayne or Learoyd who may or may not have heard Johns use that sort of language.
sg @ 56,
That’s right. I moved in with a family friend many years ago and the first thing that hit me was how often he said the word ‘c__t’. It like you said had basically turned into a replacement for ‘man’ or ‘guy’, “I was driving along and I saw this c__t/I used to work at this place and the c__t that used to run the joint” etc. At first it was actually pretty hard to get used to hearing it a number of times in ever single conversation.
He had an old, sick and dying father and not long after I first moved in we were having a chat and out of nowhere he called his father a ‘useless c__t’ and unfortunately I instictively laughed thinking how could anyone say that about their dying father only to later realise he wasn’t actually putting him down.
sg @ 56,
That’s right. I moved in with a family friend many years ago and the first thing that hit me was how often he said the word ‘c__t’. It like you said had basically turned into a replacement for ‘man’ or ‘guy’, “I was driving along and I saw this c__t/I used to work at this place and the c__t that used to run the joint” etc. At first it was actually pretty hard to get used to hearing it a number of times in ever single conversation.
He had an old, sick and dying father and not long after I first moved in we were having a chat and out of nowhere he called his father a ‘useless c__t’ and unfortunately I instictively laughed thinking how could anyone say that about their dying father only to later realise he wasn’t actually putting him down.
Tahu mistake was he could hav first attempted telling Johns personaly and privately or in front of othr Players , seeing he played with Johns at Newcastle AND Johns is one of his present Club coachs If that failed , go public
Also no one here seems to undrstand that Johns called HIMSELF “white trash”
So clearly Johns was not being racist , but simply talking standard lingo and language of that peer Group environment
This seems more an issue of educaton of understanding how such remarks in reality is received by th minority Group recipient (which is mostly regarded as racist) , rather than mightier than thou attitudes of retribution
Richard Green
#15
“So what Johns says becomes indicative of Rugby League, or of NSW, or of the working class, or of TV personalities, or just of the Johns family rather than of People Like Us.No wonder we can’t fight prejudice when we so heartily adopt prejudice as justifications. When this furore is over we can go back to bashing Islam to show case how tolerant we are.”
Agree with your post
Also Muslims is most racialy vilified Group in oz , but who seeems to cares
Tahu mistake was he could hav first attempted telling Johns personaly and privately or in front of othr Players , seeing he played with Johns at Newcastle AND Johns is one of his present Club coachs If that failed , go public
Also no one here seems to undrstand that Johns called HIMSELF “white trash”
So clearly Johns was not being racist , but simply talking standard lingo and language of that peer Group environment
This seems more an issue of educaton of understanding how such remarks in reality is received by th minority Group recipient (which is mostly regarded as racist) , rather than mightier than thou attitudes of retribution
Richard Green
#15
“So what Johns says becomes indicative of Rugby League, or of NSW, or of the working class, or of TV personalities, or just of the Johns family rather than of People Like Us.No wonder we can’t fight prejudice when we so heartily adopt prejudice as justifications. When this furore is over we can go back to bashing Islam to show case how tolerant we are.”
Agree with your post
Also Muslims is most racialy vilified Group in oz , but who seeems to cares
Or else, having known Johns for so many years he judged that as long as it was just in-house then Johns would just try and laugh it off and try to present Tahu to the management and other players as over-sensitive. By going to the press Tahu made sure that Johns actually had to take it seriously.
Or else, having known Johns for so many years he judged that as long as it was just in-house then Johns would just try and laugh it off and try to present Tahu to the management and other players as over-sensitive. By going to the press Tahu made sure that Johns actually had to take it seriously.
The key word here, Paul@34 is almost certainly related to words for “knowing” (in this case of the carnal kind). Compare the word ken (a word for “know” still used in places like Aberdeen, Scotland) which in Old English is cennan — to acknowledge or make known — the causative form of which (to become acquainted with) is cunnan. In pre-Germanic one finds kunnan doing the same work, with the contemporary word kennen meaning to know in the sense of being familiar with …
Equally interesting from an etymological POV is that the single 1st (and 3rd) person present indicative form of cunnan is the contemporary word can, which at the time could also mean to have carnal knowledge of as well as to have power to. Very telling. Consider also the overlap between knowledge and power in the contemporary word cunning. It’s interesting but probably etymologically accidental that an amusing spoonerism is created by using the phrase cunning stunts.
The key word here, Paul@34 is almost certainly related to words for “knowing” (in this case of the carnal kind). Compare the word ken (a word for “know” still used in places like Aberdeen, Scotland) which in Old English is cennan — to acknowledge or make known — the causative form of which (to become acquainted with) is cunnan. In pre-Germanic one finds kunnan doing the same work, with the contemporary word kennen meaning to know in the sense of being familiar with …
Equally interesting from an etymological POV is that the single 1st (and 3rd) person present indicative form of cunnan is the contemporary word can, which at the time could also mean to have carnal knowledge of as well as to have power to. Very telling. Consider also the overlap between knowledge and power in the contemporary word cunning. It’s interesting but probably etymologically accidental that an amusing spoonerism is created by using the phrase cunning stunts.
In retrospect ,this almost has served as a dog whistle for racism,against other humans like Iran.Seeing running with the ball is in this code,and running at the mouth would be another way of describing the non-rising inflection word..Rudd spotted a oppurtunity to brown nose.
In retrospect ,this almost has served as a dog whistle for racism,against other humans like Iran.Seeing running with the ball is in this code,and running at the mouth would be another way of describing the non-rising inflection word..Rudd spotted a oppurtunity to brown nose.
He may well have done that in the past Ron, or seen other players try it and be ignored. I think he did the right thing.
He may well have done that in the past Ron, or seen other players try it and be ignored. I think he did the right thing.
D’ye ken John Peel with his coat so
gay,
D’ye ken John Peel at the break of
day,
D’ye ken John Peel when he’s far away,
With his hounds and his horn in the
morning.
D’ye ken John Peel with his coat so
gay,
D’ye ken John Peel at the break of
day,
D’ye ken John Peel when he’s far away,
With his hounds and his horn in the
morning.
Either/or?
Can’t it be both?
In fact, how can it possibly be either/or?
Either/or?
Can’t it be both?
In fact, how can it possibly be either/or?
Tig Tog
“Or else, having known Johns for so many years he judged that as long as it was just in-house then Johns would just try and laugh it off and try to present Tahu to the management and other players as over-sensitive.”
that is a wimp attitude to facing racism , rather than actualy trying to get a positive outcome by speaking to Johns directly (in front of othr players or privately)
Whereas Tahu’s response was not wimpish but ill judged wishing to public vent issue in anger, and he did not try to otherwise he’d hav said he did try a direct approach
Mindy
“He may well have done that in the past Ron, or seen other players try it and be ignored”
As I said Mindy earlier , if his direct approach to johns then did fail , go public
So I do totaly agree with your point that had direct earlier direct (unsucessful) approachs been made to Johns , then Tahu had every rite to go Public
Advantage of a direct sucess approach to Johns , is given his Legend Footy status he’d then become a ‘willing’ ambassador for change (which is what is desird) instead of a reluctant one , or instead even worse seen as a ‘victum’ of politcal corrcetness
Tig Tog
“Or else, having known Johns for so many years he judged that as long as it was just in-house then Johns would just try and laugh it off and try to present Tahu to the management and other players as over-sensitive.”
that is a wimp attitude to facing racism , rather than actualy trying to get a positive outcome by speaking to Johns directly (in front of othr players or privately)
Whereas Tahu’s response was not wimpish but ill judged wishing to public vent issue in anger, and he did not try to otherwise he’d hav said he did try a direct approach
Mindy
“He may well have done that in the past Ron, or seen other players try it and be ignored”
As I said Mindy earlier , if his direct approach to johns then did fail , go public
So I do totaly agree with your point that had direct earlier direct (unsucessful) approachs been made to Johns , then Tahu had every rite to go Public
Advantage of a direct sucess approach to Johns , is given his Legend Footy status he’d then become a ‘willing’ ambassador for change (which is what is desird) instead of a reluctant one , or instead even worse seen as a ‘victum’ of politcal corrcetness
Thanks Sam, but this usage of ken, thought relsted to knowledge, is likely to be about sight. In navigation in the 18th century the word referred to one’s ability to identify objects on the horizon.
Interestingly, this lexical link between knowledge and sight appear as far back as 7000 years ago in Sanskrit — where the term vidya refers to one’s awareness of the the metaphysical and universe of which they are an instant. Words like wide, vision, video, wisdom, witch (and of course video) etc are cognates.
Thanks Sam, but this usage of ken, thought relsted to knowledge, is likely to be about sight. In navigation in the 18th century the word referred to one’s ability to identify objects on the horizon.
Interestingly, this lexical link between knowledge and sight appear as far back as 7000 years ago in Sanskrit — where the term vidya refers to one’s awareness of the the metaphysical and universe of which they are an instant. Words like wide, vision, video, wisdom, witch (and of course video) etc are cognates.
ron, when someone apologises the wronged party is not actually under an obligation to accept the apology.
I recall Tahu saying early in the piece that an apology was not the point. Tahu wants a better world for his kids than he experienced himself. I think that is his prime concern.
ron, when someone apologises the wronged party is not actually under an obligation to accept the apology.
I recall Tahu saying early in the piece that an apology was not the point. Tahu wants a better world for his kids than he experienced himself. I think that is his prime concern.
The person I mentioned @ 16 who spoke to Madonna King was Sol Bellear, Indigenous Rugby League Council board member.
The ABC write up of the interview is here. You will recall that he was the one who identified the extent of Johns’ inappropriate language.
The person I mentioned @ 16 who spoke to Madonna King was Sol Bellear, Indigenous Rugby League Council board member.
The ABC write up of the interview is here. You will recall that he was the one who identified the extent of Johns’ inappropriate language.
Gee, it’s unfortunate that vilified people don’t make sure that they conform to all the rules & strictures Ron has personally laid down for their use when daring to speak up about something.
And people say the *Left* stifle discussion.
Gee, it’s unfortunate that vilified people don’t make sure that they conform to all the rules & strictures Ron has personally laid down for their use when daring to speak up about something.
And people say the *Left* stifle discussion.
Brian
“ron, when someone apologises the wronged party is not actually under an obligation to accept the apology.”
I never made that claim at all , instead I was talking out getting posotive outcomes
In any event whilst no one is forsed to accept an apology as you correctly said , its pretty stupid not accepting anyone’s genuine appology…because communicating properly an issue of racist offense and getting a guenuine appology hould satisfy individual grevianse AND changes offenders’s future attitudes , which surely is th desired outcome
They then become genuine ambassador for change of attitudes in future to othrs
So Tahu should made a direct approach & his decision was ill judged in anger going public…unless circumstance per what Mindy said
Brian
“ron, when someone apologises the wronged party is not actually under an obligation to accept the apology.”
I never made that claim at all , instead I was talking out getting posotive outcomes
In any event whilst no one is forsed to accept an apology as you correctly said , its pretty stupid not accepting anyone’s genuine appology…because communicating properly an issue of racist offense and getting a guenuine appology hould satisfy individual grevianse AND changes offenders’s future attitudes , which surely is th desired outcome
They then become genuine ambassador for change of attitudes in future to othrs
So Tahu should made a direct approach & his decision was ill judged in anger going public…unless circumstance per what Mindy said
It probably depends on whether he thought the apology was genuine, or just something that Johns knew he had to do. Sometimes apologies aren’t enough and need to be followed up with action to redress the wrong.
It probably depends on whether he thought the apology was genuine, or just something that Johns knew he had to do. Sometimes apologies aren’t enough and need to be followed up with action to redress the wrong.
I don’t think Tahu particularly wants Johns himself to be any sort of “ambassador for change”, he wants the whole culture that has allowed Johns et frere and others like them to get away with corrosive crap like this for years/decades to be put on notice that it’s time to change.
Also, the idea of either Johns brother actually taking notice of anybody lower on the totem pole challenging his behaviour, without the media kicking up a stink? Pshaw – pull the other one. The many pubs from which they’ve have been banned around Newcastle since the early 90s have got sore ribs laughing at that idea.
I don’t think Tahu particularly wants Johns himself to be any sort of “ambassador for change”, he wants the whole culture that has allowed Johns et frere and others like them to get away with corrosive crap like this for years/decades to be put on notice that it’s time to change.
Also, the idea of either Johns brother actually taking notice of anybody lower on the totem pole challenging his behaviour, without the media kicking up a stink? Pshaw – pull the other one. The many pubs from which they’ve have been banned around Newcastle since the early 90s have got sore ribs laughing at that idea.
It could be worse, could be claims for people to desensitise themselves to such stimuli like the “left” likes to do.
It could be worse, could be claims for people to desensitise themselves to such stimuli like the “left” likes to do.
From ABC Sport:
From ABC Sport:
So, is Andrew Johns a stupid prick or a dumb cunt?…. and which is worse?
I absolutely agree that racist or homophobic slurs are unnacceptable, but is calling someone a cunt any worse than calling them a prick, a bastard, or that all encompassing ‘dick head’. Why is a cunt worse than a dick head?
So, is Andrew Johns a stupid prick or a dumb cunt?…. and which is worse?
I absolutely agree that racist or homophobic slurs are unnacceptable, but is calling someone a cunt any worse than calling them a prick, a bastard, or that all encompassing ‘dick head’. Why is a cunt worse than a dick head?
It’s an interesting question, Andrew, but I doubt you’d get much argument down the average local watering hole that calling someone a cunt is considered much more aggressive/insulting than calling them a dick-head. So why indeed is that the case?
It’s an interesting question, Andrew, but I doubt you’d get much argument down the average local watering hole that calling someone a cunt is considered much more aggressive/insulting than calling them a dick-head. So why indeed is that the case?
” … The bizarre thing Iorarua is that women, in my experience, are rarely if ever called c**ts. … ”
*
Fran,
*
Go to Walgett. You’ll hear it all the time.
” … The bizarre thing Iorarua is that women, in my experience, are rarely if ever called c**ts. … ”
*
Fran,
*
Go to Walgett. You’ll hear it all the time.
Tigtog
“I don’t think Tahu particularly wants Johns himself to be any sort of “ambassador for change”, he wants the whole culture that has allowed Johns et frere and others like them to get away with corrosive crap like this for years/decades to be put on notice that it’s time to change.”
Nonsense , that is YOUR opinion of what should happen
Neither Foleau nor especially aboriginee star Greg Ingkls pulled out of th match , thereby making your argment baseless
Tahu made a decision that was personal to him on how HE was affected
In a more famous case , indiginous Michael Long did same ,& later said so publicly
“Also, the idea of either Johns brother actually taking notice of anybody lower on the totem pole challenging his behaviour, without the media kicking up a stink? Pshaw”
Again nonsense , what would you know personaly of Andrew Johns
But quoting someone who DOES know Andrew Johns , is Aboriginee Rugby Legend Artie Beetson who said “that he’s personally always found Johns respectful”
Fine
“It probably depends on whether he thought the apology was genuine, or just something that Johns knew he had to do”
Well you ar refering to public apology AFTER MSN got hold of it , and I agree , in those circumstanses once shite has hit fan then it is a value judgemnt
My comments Fine were in contest of had Tahu made a direct approach without MSN , and then received a genuine appology directly Tahu would know it is genuine , and know attitude had changes (and if not go public)
Outsiders can feel as self outraged as they like and demand retibution but it can result in yesterdays MSN headline soon forgot without attitude change , and in that envoirnoment may make Johns th victium of politcal corectness , given he called himself “white trash” as well and that is th lingo ..but with unknowing racist efect on recipients , making a dirct approach morel likely successful
Tigtog
“I don’t think Tahu particularly wants Johns himself to be any sort of “ambassador for change”, he wants the whole culture that has allowed Johns et frere and others like them to get away with corrosive crap like this for years/decades to be put on notice that it’s time to change.”
Nonsense , that is YOUR opinion of what should happen
Neither Foleau nor especially aboriginee star Greg Ingkls pulled out of th match , thereby making your argment baseless
Tahu made a decision that was personal to him on how HE was affected
In a more famous case , indiginous Michael Long did same ,& later said so publicly
“Also, the idea of either Johns brother actually taking notice of anybody lower on the totem pole challenging his behaviour, without the media kicking up a stink? Pshaw”
Again nonsense , what would you know personaly of Andrew Johns
But quoting someone who DOES know Andrew Johns , is Aboriginee Rugby Legend Artie Beetson who said “that he’s personally always found Johns respectful”
Fine
“It probably depends on whether he thought the apology was genuine, or just something that Johns knew he had to do”
Well you ar refering to public apology AFTER MSN got hold of it , and I agree , in those circumstanses once shite has hit fan then it is a value judgemnt
My comments Fine were in contest of had Tahu made a direct approach without MSN , and then received a genuine appology directly Tahu would know it is genuine , and know attitude had changes (and if not go public)
Outsiders can feel as self outraged as they like and demand retibution but it can result in yesterdays MSN headline soon forgot without attitude change , and in that envoirnoment may make Johns th victium of politcal corectness , given he called himself “white trash” as well and that is th lingo ..but with unknowing racist efect on recipients , making a dirct approach morel likely successful
Ron, a white person’s quite free to call himself “white trash” if he wants to, although this is clearly to deflect blame from himself and try to ham it up to gain sympathy. it’s a whole other thing when he calls another person names. Do you not get the difference? Do you also not get the difference that it’s a member of a relatively privileged group who’s choosing (Tahu did not get the choice) to pretend to bag himself?
Also again with the “political correctness” – that lazy cliche hides the fact that what Tahu wants is to be treated with a basic amount of respect as a human being. “PC” is a lazy, generalist slur which shuts down the frontal lobe in our society.
(TT, I wanted to link to Zuky’s famous 2006 post, but it’s down! Do you know if there are any copies anywhere? http://www.kaichang.net/2006/11/the_sloppy_prop.html)
Ron, a white person’s quite free to call himself “white trash” if he wants to, although this is clearly to deflect blame from himself and try to ham it up to gain sympathy. it’s a whole other thing when he calls another person names. Do you not get the difference? Do you also not get the difference that it’s a member of a relatively privileged group who’s choosing (Tahu did not get the choice) to pretend to bag himself?
Also again with the “political correctness” – that lazy cliche hides the fact that what Tahu wants is to be treated with a basic amount of respect as a human being. “PC” is a lazy, generalist slur which shuts down the frontal lobe in our society.
(TT, I wanted to link to Zuky’s famous 2006 post, but it’s down! Do you know if there are any copies anywhere? http://www.kaichang.net/2006/11/the_sloppy_prop.html)
Ah here’s a quotation from it
Ah here’s a quotation from it
Thanks for that — another reason not to go to Walgett.
Thanks for that — another reason not to go to Walgett.
Agreed Katz
I’ve never visited Walgett, but if the commenter Phillip is right, I won’t be adding it a list of places to in which to linger before passing through.
A quick tour via Google street view makes it look every bit as depressing as one would imagine without going there — indeed worse, since one generally factors in the possibility that one may be making an unfair generalisation. A quick virtual drive from the roundabout at Wee Waa Street and the Castlereagh Hwy is enough to remind me how glad I am that I don’t actually live there.
Oddly, I now have a better grasp of why those unfortunate enough to live there might indeed use terms like c**t as a substitute for a better specified expression of the kinds of sentiment that also sieze perople living in better circumstances.
Agreed Katz
I’ve never visited Walgett, but if the commenter Phillip is right, I won’t be adding it a list of places to in which to linger before passing through.
A quick tour via Google street view makes it look every bit as depressing as one would imagine without going there — indeed worse, since one generally factors in the possibility that one may be making an unfair generalisation. A quick virtual drive from the roundabout at Wee Waa Street and the Castlereagh Hwy is enough to remind me how glad I am that I don’t actually live there.
Oddly, I now have a better grasp of why those unfortunate enough to live there might indeed use terms like c**t as a substitute for a better specified expression of the kinds of sentiment that also sieze perople living in better circumstances.
Ron @ 81, you are assuming you can stand in Tahu’s shoes and decide what he should have done. It’s really quite presumptuous.
I’ve never met Artie Beetson, but I suspect he is a person the commands respect.
Ron @ 81, you are assuming you can stand in Tahu’s shoes and decide what he should have done. It’s really quite presumptuous.
I’ve never met Artie Beetson, but I suspect he is a person the commands respect.
tigtog @ 79,
I think it might have to do with the number of inflexions one can get into the pronunciation of c**t. It can be said aggressively, malevolently, even fondly, hence making it a very powerful word for expressing subtextual meaning. A bit like ‘bastard’ which while nowhere neare as offensive probably, has the same flexibility of pronunciation, and like ‘c**t’ has drifted somewhat from it original meaning when used in certain contexts.
tigtog @ 79,
I think it might have to do with the number of inflexions one can get into the pronunciation of c**t. It can be said aggressively, malevolently, even fondly, hence making it a very powerful word for expressing subtextual meaning. A bit like ‘bastard’ which while nowhere neare as offensive probably, has the same flexibility of pronunciation, and like ‘c**t’ has drifted somewhat from it original meaning when used in certain contexts.
Paul,
It’s interesting (and part of the same question!) that you need to asterisk cunt but not bastard.
It’s interesting that cunt has becuase just about the worst swear word that people can use. And yet, vulgar terms for the male genitalia have less concern.
I could getting away with calling someone a silly prick (knob, dick,etc) to their face with a sly grin. But there’s no amount of context or body language that lets me call someone a silly cunt without them taking offence.
Why is that?
Paul,
It’s interesting (and part of the same question!) that you need to asterisk cunt but not bastard.
It’s interesting that cunt has becuase just about the worst swear word that people can use. And yet, vulgar terms for the male genitalia have less concern.
I could getting away with calling someone a silly prick (knob, dick,etc) to their face with a sly grin. But there’s no amount of context or body language that lets me call someone a silly cunt without them taking offence.
Why is that?
‘become’ not ‘becuase’ (wrong word wrong spelling!)
‘become’ not ‘becuase’ (wrong word wrong spelling!)
I’m having trouble finding links. The story is that our son gave his favourite computer game to his mum to hide so that he could concentrate on studying for exams. The net result was that he downloaded some games from the internet and blew our monthly allowance. An internet connection of 64bps is no fun!
In today’s CM there were two stories relevant to this thread. First, Johns won’t appear on the SOO commentary tonight, but hope he will be back for the tigers-raiders game on Sunday. They say they are a bit concerned about him as he suffers from depression and bipolar disorder. That’s something I admit to having forgotten for the moment, but it was said to be related to his drug use.
Austereo (radio) have him on contract and will be continuing. Parramatta will decide within the next 48 hours whether he continues there. His column with the Daily Telegraph is suspended while they think about it.
The other story, by Andrew Webster and Matt Marshall, is that Timana Tahu says that Sol Bellear didn’t talk to him and “he doesn’t know what he’s talking about” in relation to the extensive racial slurs supposedly uttered by Johns. That was not from Tahu directly but from the Parramatta CEO Paul Osborne.
So the Bellear statement is looking like a beat-up. This is most regrettable.
I’m having trouble finding links. The story is that our son gave his favourite computer game to his mum to hide so that he could concentrate on studying for exams. The net result was that he downloaded some games from the internet and blew our monthly allowance. An internet connection of 64bps is no fun!
In today’s CM there were two stories relevant to this thread. First, Johns won’t appear on the SOO commentary tonight, but hope he will be back for the tigers-raiders game on Sunday. They say they are a bit concerned about him as he suffers from depression and bipolar disorder. That’s something I admit to having forgotten for the moment, but it was said to be related to his drug use.
Austereo (radio) have him on contract and will be continuing. Parramatta will decide within the next 48 hours whether he continues there. His column with the Daily Telegraph is suspended while they think about it.
The other story, by Andrew Webster and Matt Marshall, is that Timana Tahu says that Sol Bellear didn’t talk to him and “he doesn’t know what he’s talking about” in relation to the extensive racial slurs supposedly uttered by Johns. That was not from Tahu directly but from the Parramatta CEO Paul Osborne.
So the Bellear statement is looking like a beat-up. This is most regrettable.
Brian … not sure what your plan is but at Optus you can have a 50/70 = 120GB peak offpeak split for about $50 per month. Tell the boy that downloading after midnight and before midday is offpeak.
I didn’t mean that to sound like and ad, and to the best of my knowledge have no pecuniary interest in Optus or its affiliated companies.
Brian … not sure what your plan is but at Optus you can have a 50/70 = 120GB peak offpeak split for about $50 per month. Tell the boy that downloading after midnight and before midday is offpeak.
I didn’t mean that to sound like and ad, and to the best of my knowledge have no pecuniary interest in Optus or its affiliated companies.
Andrew @ 88,
I asterisk c**t because some people on this thread clearly find it offensive, and I’m considerate of their feelings. Normally I wouldn’t.
Also, I don’t know if speeling c**t out in full will put me in moderation, and I generally don’t like that happening because it takes me out of the discussion.
As to words for male genitalia, they’re normally not used with the vehemence reserved for c**t, and hence are generally not as insulting. (Unless of course, one is, for example, calling Tony Abbott an evil or stupid prick. In my book he’s both.)
Andrew @ 88,
I asterisk c**t because some people on this thread clearly find it offensive, and I’m considerate of their feelings. Normally I wouldn’t.
Also, I don’t know if speeling c**t out in full will put me in moderation, and I generally don’t like that happening because it takes me out of the discussion.
As to words for male genitalia, they’re normally not used with the vehemence reserved for c**t, and hence are generally not as insulting. (Unless of course, one is, for example, calling Tony Abbott an evil or stupid prick. In my book he’s both.)
Fran @ 91, that’s helpful. I’m with Bigpond and Telstra with loyalty and total package discounts.
He blew the budget once many years ago and I paid $5 per month for an unlimited service. It was actually a shock to find that it’s not now unlimited and has a 12GB limit. I’m sure they snuck that in via the small print along the way. So I’m not impressed, but changing is so disruptive.
Partly I’ve stuck with Bigpond because I had about 4 different ones before that and by and large Bigpond actually works and their help centre people know what they are talking about.
Fran @ 91, that’s helpful. I’m with Bigpond and Telstra with loyalty and total package discounts.
He blew the budget once many years ago and I paid $5 per month for an unlimited service. It was actually a shock to find that it’s not now unlimited and has a 12GB limit. I’m sure they snuck that in via the small print along the way. So I’m not impressed, but changing is so disruptive.
Partly I’ve stuck with Bigpond because I had about 4 different ones before that and by and large Bigpond actually works and their help centre people know what they are talking about.
Fran, to add to that, I’m on cable, which has to be Bigpond. Going the other way would need some investigation and probably upgrading phone equipment and connections. Sigh!!!
Fran, to add to that, I’m on cable, which has to be Bigpond. Going the other way would need some investigation and probably upgrading phone equipment and connections. Sigh!!!
BRIAN
“I’ve never met Artie Beetson, but I suspect he is a person the commands respect.”
Brian , yes he does An Aboriginal Rugby Legend respected by aboriginal & other austalians having any links to rugby League
Here is another Aboriginal’s take on issue and his reaction…Sydney paper today:
“ANDREW Johns emerged from hiding last night to honour a long-term promise to coach La Perouse United rugby league team – complete with its 15 Aboriginal and two white players.
The man at the centre of the State of Origin racism storm coached the team to keep his word following the death of one of the club’s players.
The timing of the session reeks of a publicity stunt to counter public condemnation of Johns’ disgraceful remarks in the Blues camp last week, which led to an offended Timana Tahu walking out.
But it can be revealed Johns’ links to the club long pre-dated last week’s scandal. Christopher Lyons, an INDIGINOUS rugby league player, died in a trial game earlier this year.
Johns was so moved when he heard of the player’s death that he rang the team’s coach, Troy Rugless, back in April to offer support.
“Put me down for a fundraiser or I’ll help out with some coaching,” Johns told the coach at the time.
When the furore erupted over the Tahu affair, Rugless contacted Johns and asked, since he would not be in Brisbane, whether he would come to La Perouse.
So instead of being at Ballymore to put the Blues through their final session for tonight’s Origin blockbuster, Johns turned up at Yarra Oval, near the shores of Botany Bay last night.
No television cameras, no radio stations, no sign of his agent John Fordham. No quotes, no set-up photos. We took our pictures from a distance.
The Daily Telegraph discovered Johns’ secret engagement via a tip-off from a Souths junior rugby league source.
When approached, all Johns would say is: “Look, I’ve only got myself to blame for being here and not in Brisbane but I’m glad to be helping the boys out.”
He trained the A-grade side for about an hour, taking them through passing and running skills.
He signed autographs for the young Aboriginals from the under-15′s who had trained beforehand.
Rugless, who is part ABORIGINAL himself, said the players were honoured to have the dumped Blues assistant coach at training, despite his comments at a team bonding session that led to his standing down from the Blues.
“What happened with the NSW team was obviously VERY REGRETABLE,” Rugless said last night.
“People get pumped up in rugby league and say things like ‘go and smash that red-headed bastard’ and stuff like that.
“I can tell you Joey (Andrew Johns) admires black people. He’s having a lot of fun tonight and the boys really appreciate having him here.”
implication of a knowingly making racist remarks is false …Education and proper direct explanation not vilification was needed
BRIAN
“I’ve never met Artie Beetson, but I suspect he is a person the commands respect.”
Brian , yes he does An Aboriginal Rugby Legend respected by aboriginal & other austalians having any links to rugby League
Here is another Aboriginal’s take on issue and his reaction…Sydney paper today:
“ANDREW Johns emerged from hiding last night to honour a long-term promise to coach La Perouse United rugby league team – complete with its 15 Aboriginal and two white players.
The man at the centre of the State of Origin racism storm coached the team to keep his word following the death of one of the club’s players.
The timing of the session reeks of a publicity stunt to counter public condemnation of Johns’ disgraceful remarks in the Blues camp last week, which led to an offended Timana Tahu walking out.
But it can be revealed Johns’ links to the club long pre-dated last week’s scandal. Christopher Lyons, an INDIGINOUS rugby league player, died in a trial game earlier this year.
Johns was so moved when he heard of the player’s death that he rang the team’s coach, Troy Rugless, back in April to offer support.
“Put me down for a fundraiser or I’ll help out with some coaching,” Johns told the coach at the time.
When the furore erupted over the Tahu affair, Rugless contacted Johns and asked, since he would not be in Brisbane, whether he would come to La Perouse.
So instead of being at Ballymore to put the Blues through their final session for tonight’s Origin blockbuster, Johns turned up at Yarra Oval, near the shores of Botany Bay last night.
No television cameras, no radio stations, no sign of his agent John Fordham. No quotes, no set-up photos. We took our pictures from a distance.
The Daily Telegraph discovered Johns’ secret engagement via a tip-off from a Souths junior rugby league source.
When approached, all Johns would say is: “Look, I’ve only got myself to blame for being here and not in Brisbane but I’m glad to be helping the boys out.”
He trained the A-grade side for about an hour, taking them through passing and running skills.
He signed autographs for the young Aboriginals from the under-15′s who had trained beforehand.
Rugless, who is part ABORIGINAL himself, said the players were honoured to have the dumped Blues assistant coach at training, despite his comments at a team bonding session that led to his standing down from the Blues.
“What happened with the NSW team was obviously VERY REGRETABLE,” Rugless said last night.
“People get pumped up in rugby league and say things like ‘go and smash that red-headed bastard’ and stuff like that.
“I can tell you Joey (Andrew Johns) admires black people. He’s having a lot of fun tonight and the boys really appreciate having him here.”
implication of a knowingly making racist remarks is false …Education and proper direct explanation not vilification was needed
Stop defending him, he’s not worth it.
Stop defending him, he’s not worth it.
Les Malezer at the
National Indigenous Times suggests that the NRL has flunked the issue by not insisting that Tahu rejoin the game tonight after naming his own terms:
Les Malezer at the
National Indigenous Times suggests that the NRL has flunked the issue by not insisting that Tahu rejoin the game tonight after naming his own terms:
Maybe, anthony, if for no other reason that an apology lacks something unless there is an attempt to set the matter to rights, which should involve an element of restitution.
But I’m inclined to think that Tahu wouldn’t want to turn himself around emotionally to the point where he is up to an SOO match.
He should be a definite for game 3, however, and I wouldn’t like to see Johns back in the commentary box, then or ever. There have to be consequences commensurate to the deed.
Maybe, anthony, if for no other reason that an apology lacks something unless there is an attempt to set the matter to rights, which should involve an element of restitution.
But I’m inclined to think that Tahu wouldn’t want to turn himself around emotionally to the point where he is up to an SOO match.
He should be a definite for game 3, however, and I wouldn’t like to see Johns back in the commentary box, then or ever. There have to be consequences commensurate to the deed.
I’d like to see Anthony Mundine’s suggestion taken up, and then have them challenge non-Indigenous/Islander players to also call off participating.
Ideally, they’d extend that to the RL competition proper.
That would be fabulous and move the game to where it needs to be.
I’d like to see Anthony Mundine’s suggestion taken up, and then have them challenge non-Indigenous/Islander players to also call off participating.
Ideally, they’d extend that to the RL competition proper.
That would be fabulous and move the game to where it needs to be.
Fran
Mundine has no credibility
and is idea is stupid which is why Folau and aborigine star Greg Inglis hav not and will not withdraw !
Brian
“But I’m inclined to think that Tahu wouldn’t want to turn himself around emotionally to the point where he is up to an SOO match.”
Agree , although even if emotion ok , he’d not play & correctly so as it would now diminish his views by now playing
As to my #95 re coach La Perouse United rugby league team , it does demolish Media narative of Andrew Johns…issue is ignoranse of culteral environment needing education and preferrably a initial direct Tahu approach as I originaly stated , and not wilful racism And Mindy that was point of La Perouse article , not defense
Fran
Mundine has no credibility
and is idea is stupid which is why Folau and aborigine star Greg Inglis hav not and will not withdraw !
Brian
“But I’m inclined to think that Tahu wouldn’t want to turn himself around emotionally to the point where he is up to an SOO match.”
Agree , although even if emotion ok , he’d not play & correctly so as it would now diminish his views by now playing
As to my #95 re coach La Perouse United rugby league team , it does demolish Media narative of Andrew Johns…issue is ignoranse of culteral environment needing education and preferrably a initial direct Tahu approach as I originaly stated , and not wilful racism And Mindy that was point of La Perouse article , not defense
Fran, if you think about where Timana Tahu would be now if it weren’t for the opportunities his football talent have given him I think you might have the answer why there is never going to be a boycott.
I know there are structural problems that should be addressed another way, but all I’m saying is that the players themselves see sports such as RL as an opportunity.
Fran, if you think about where Timana Tahu would be now if it weren’t for the opportunities his football talent have given him I think you might have the answer why there is never going to be a boycott.
I know there are structural problems that should be addressed another way, but all I’m saying is that the players themselves see sports such as RL as an opportunity.
And this morning, AFL takes the heat off the NRL with some numpty calling indigenous players “cannibals”. Wow.
If he had enough awareness to say that on the way out of the lunch, he should have had enough awareness not to bloody say racist rubbish in front of the mic.
Also, via Shaun at Sidelined:
Many white Australians grew up thinking that doing a great “impression” of a straight-from-Central-Casting redneck racist was perfectly OK just as long as all that calling non-Anglos all sorts of slurs was obviously “just a joke” and “meant in good fun” and “they don’t mind, they know we don’t really mean it”. Except if you keep on repeating these “joke” slurs every single day, then really – do you really not really mean it? Especially when if someone stands up against them as hurtful and hateful, the best line of defence you can come up with is along the lines of how that person should just harden the fuck up and learn to take a joke? As if they haven’t been “taking the joke” all their lives already?
Tahu has stepped up and got it on the front pages that this shit is hurtful and corrosive to one’s sense of dignity, no matter how much “fun” everybody else might be having with it. He wants it to stop with this generation and not have his son’s sense of self corroded by the same thing as he grows up. It doesn’t matter whether people are being consciously racist or just uncaringly insensitive when they repeat these slurs as a “joke”. The words are still racist, and the casual slinging around of these words as if they don’t really matter is what has to end ASAP.
And this morning, AFL takes the heat off the NRL with some numpty calling indigenous players “cannibals”. Wow.
If he had enough awareness to say that on the way out of the lunch, he should have had enough awareness not to bloody say racist rubbish in front of the mic.
Also, via Shaun at Sidelined:
Many white Australians grew up thinking that doing a great “impression” of a straight-from-Central-Casting redneck racist was perfectly OK just as long as all that calling non-Anglos all sorts of slurs was obviously “just a joke” and “meant in good fun” and “they don’t mind, they know we don’t really mean it”. Except if you keep on repeating these “joke” slurs every single day, then really – do you really not really mean it? Especially when if someone stands up against them as hurtful and hateful, the best line of defence you can come up with is along the lines of how that person should just harden the fuck up and learn to take a joke? As if they haven’t been “taking the joke” all their lives already?
Tahu has stepped up and got it on the front pages that this shit is hurtful and corrosive to one’s sense of dignity, no matter how much “fun” everybody else might be having with it. He wants it to stop with this generation and not have his son’s sense of self corroded by the same thing as he grows up. It doesn’t matter whether people are being consciously racist or just uncaringly insensitive when they repeat these slurs as a “joke”. The words are still racist, and the casual slinging around of these words as if they don’t really matter is what has to end ASAP.
Oh doubtless that is so Brian. I was just indulging myself in a vison of a better world, much as I indulged myself with the throught that The Greens might get 9 or even 10 seats in the Tasmanian election or that NSW would go down by 60 points. (I got to hang onto that oen for quite a while)
I knew that was fantasy, but dreaming is fun.
Oh doubtless that is so Brian. I was just indulging myself in a vison of a better world, much as I indulged myself with the throught that The Greens might get 9 or even 10 seats in the Tasmanian election or that NSW would go down by 60 points. (I got to hang onto that oen for quite a while)
I knew that was fantasy, but dreaming is fun.
Mal Brown is a prize old-school f**k-wit.
Mal Brown is a prize old-school f**k-wit.
Amazing, tigtog, but then again not so surprising. The Steve Mascord piece linked above is good. He ends with:
Tahu keeps saying he did if for his children. His eldest, Leketa, is a girl, don’t know about the gender of the other two.
Unfortunately John Howard’s attack on the PC brigade, as he saw it, gave a licence to a lot of loose talk. As Mascord says, Tahu’s stand may just be a watershed in what is acceptable.
Amazing, tigtog, but then again not so surprising. The Steve Mascord piece linked above is good. He ends with:
Tahu keeps saying he did if for his children. His eldest, Leketa, is a girl, don’t know about the gender of the other two.
Unfortunately John Howard’s attack on the PC brigade, as he saw it, gave a licence to a lot of loose talk. As Mascord says, Tahu’s stand may just be a watershed in what is acceptable.
Ron:
“Mundine has no credibility”.
Can’t help myself. After the flogging he gave Green he has a lot of cred as a boxer even if not as a political strategist. If Green could have actually landed a punch he might have torn The Mouth’s head off. As it was da mouf was da snake on da night. Pure class.
Ron:
“Mundine has no credibility”.
Can’t help myself. After the flogging he gave Green he has a lot of cred as a boxer even if not as a political strategist. If Green could have actually landed a punch he might have torn The Mouth’s head off. As it was da mouf was da snake on da night. Pure class.
I’ve just listened to Mal Brown of the AFL “unreservedly apologizing” for yesterday calling some of the players “cannibals.” At the start of the interview he said he couldn’t understand what the fuss was about because “Rudd has stuffed up the country,” and at the end of the interview he called the interviewer a “conman.”
I’ve just listened to Mal Brown of the AFL “unreservedly apologizing” for yesterday calling some of the players “cannibals.” At the start of the interview he said he couldn’t understand what the fuss was about because “Rudd has stuffed up the country,” and at the end of the interview he called the interviewer a “conman.”
Not one of their brighter sparks, I think.
Not one of their brighter sparks, I think.
Tigtog
you can continue with YOUR own fantasy of Tahu living out your own dreams of Aboriginee Tahu instantly acting as a white knight for th aboriginee race , despite evidense of how he reacted , and indeed how Michael Long and Nicky Winmar also did , ….personal & instinctive
As said , fact Folau and Inglis DID play shows your views baseless
Anthony Nolan
Ron:“Mundine has no credibility”.
“Can’t help myself. After the flogging he gave Green he has a lot of cred as a boxer even if not as a political strategist”
Well his comments on 9/11 and other views he’s said show he is a dope
Comarisions of Andrew Johns to Mal Brown ar foolish
Mal Brown is a boofhead , has form for it ove 20 years , and never done great work for Aboriginees , and prob is a racist
WHEREAS bloggers hear seem fearful of reading meesage my #95 , jut one example of Andrew Johns works for aboriginees , and further he is widely respected by aborignees like aborigee legend Artie Beetson
and he is not a racist…people seem to confuse lingo of footy environment & a SOO at that , with wilful racism , and education is solution…rather than unsubstanitated allegation rants from arm chair theorists
Tigtog
you can continue with YOUR own fantasy of Tahu living out your own dreams of Aboriginee Tahu instantly acting as a white knight for th aboriginee race , despite evidense of how he reacted , and indeed how Michael Long and Nicky Winmar also did , ….personal & instinctive
As said , fact Folau and Inglis DID play shows your views baseless
Anthony Nolan
Ron:“Mundine has no credibility”.
“Can’t help myself. After the flogging he gave Green he has a lot of cred as a boxer even if not as a political strategist”
Well his comments on 9/11 and other views he’s said show he is a dope
Comarisions of Andrew Johns to Mal Brown ar foolish
Mal Brown is a boofhead , has form for it ove 20 years , and never done great work for Aboriginees , and prob is a racist
WHEREAS bloggers hear seem fearful of reading meesage my #95 , jut one example of Andrew Johns works for aboriginees , and further he is widely respected by aborignees like aborigee legend Artie Beetson
and he is not a racist…people seem to confuse lingo of footy environment & a SOO at that , with wilful racism , and education is solution…rather than unsubstanitated allegation rants from arm chair theorists
Ah, so we have a special zone as it were, where anything is permissible ‘cos you’re a footballer? I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a blatant description of blind privilege anywhere.
Indeed.
Ah, so we have a special zone as it were, where anything is permissible ‘cos you’re a footballer? I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a blatant description of blind privilege anywhere.
Indeed.
@Ron
???
???
I have no idea what either of those sentences is supposed to mean. They are just word salad. Please clarify.
@Ron
???
???
I have no idea what either of those sentences is supposed to mean. They are just word salad. Please clarify.
A little while ago tigtog, a moderator drew my attention to the comments policy when I said that Ron was “babbling”. I almost used the term “word salad”. Others since have encountered similar problems.
Your assertion above affirms my first claim. As I said, it may not be Ron’s fault. He may not be trolling. However that may be I regard his posts as not having the substance to warrant the work in unpicking them. YMMV of course.
A little while ago tigtog, a moderator drew my attention to the comments policy when I said that Ron was “babbling”. I almost used the term “word salad”. Others since have encountered similar problems.
Your assertion above affirms my first claim. As I said, it may not be Ron’s fault. He may not be trolling. However that may be I regard his posts as not having the substance to warrant the work in unpicking them. YMMV of course.
Fran, the moderators are not a hivemind, and it wasn’t me who said something to you in that instance IIRC, but FWIW “babbling” implies an ableist value judgement on the mind producing the words. “Word salad” is a description of the words on the page. I hope that you see the distinction.
Fran, the moderators are not a hivemind, and it wasn’t me who said something to you in that instance IIRC, but FWIW “babbling” implies an ableist value judgement on the mind producing the words. “Word salad” is a description of the words on the page. I hope that you see the distinction.
tigtog,
That is rubbish! Babble implies to speak quickly without thought.It has nothing whatever to do with being disabled.
tigtog,
That is rubbish! Babble implies to speak quickly without thought.It has nothing whatever to do with being disabled.
I hadn’t considered babbling in that context. I’d always assumed (without checking it was so) that the reference was to the Towers of Babel of Biblical lore. One also hears the term used to describe the sounds of water passing over rocks in streams.
Then again, whatever its etymology, I can see that it might be construed as trading on arbitrary animus towards those with speech impediments, so the caution would be fair enough. Thanks for drawing this to my notice.
I hadn’t considered babbling in that context. I’d always assumed (without checking it was so) that the reference was to the Towers of Babel of Biblical lore. One also hears the term used to describe the sounds of water passing over rocks in streams.
Then again, whatever its etymology, I can see that it might be construed as trading on arbitrary animus towards those with speech impediments, so the caution would be fair enough. Thanks for drawing this to my notice.
Paul, I’ve certainly heard of “babbling” used disparagingly, and in a coded way (“he’s babbling again”), towards bipolar people in the manic phase. Again, I wasn’t the moderator in question, but that would be my guess as to the reason.
ETA: Also, etymology does not, sadly, trump usage. There’s is absolutely nothing racist about the etymology of the word “niggardly”, but if you’re a waitstaff of colour serving a table of Whites who are making a point of your service being “niggardly” and silently daring you to complain, that doesn’t make it any less offensive, does it?
Paul, I’ve certainly heard of “babbling” used disparagingly, and in a coded way (“he’s babbling again”), towards bipolar people in the manic phase. Again, I wasn’t the moderator in question, but that would be my guess as to the reason.
ETA: Also, etymology does not, sadly, trump usage. There’s is absolutely nothing racist about the etymology of the word “niggardly”, but if you’re a waitstaff of colour serving a table of Whites who are making a point of your service being “niggardly” and silently daring you to complain, that doesn’t make it any less offensive, does it?
I suspect PB, that tigtog is arguing that “babbling” presupposes a disordered or inferior mind — which could be to set up categories of the normal/subnormal on which to trade in one’s standing.
One thinks of babies or perhaps those affected by mental incapacity as babbling, and so the description goes not merely to the output — incoherent speech, but to the allusion to inferior cultural standing based on intellectual capacity.
I suspect PB, that tigtog is arguing that “babbling” presupposes a disordered or inferior mind — which could be to set up categories of the normal/subnormal on which to trade in one’s standing.
One thinks of babies or perhaps those affected by mental incapacity as babbling, and so the description goes not merely to the output — incoherent speech, but to the allusion to inferior cultural standing based on intellectual capacity.
Many people on this blog express their ideas quite brilliantly, others are succinct or witty or thought provoking in various ways. We recognize those who contribute regularly and ‘build up’ some sort of picture of their persona.
Reading Ron’s posts is really hard work. Although trying not to be a pedant or demanding perfection in spelling/grammar etc I have to ask are you really wanting everyone to read right through your posts, Ron, or to give up half way through?
Many people on this blog express their ideas quite brilliantly, others are succinct or witty or thought provoking in various ways. We recognize those who contribute regularly and ‘build up’ some sort of picture of their persona.
Reading Ron’s posts is really hard work. Although trying not to be a pedant or demanding perfection in spelling/grammar etc I have to ask are you really wanting everyone to read right through your posts, Ron, or to give up half way through?
I suppose this means that Wordsworth (“In every babbling brook he finds a friend”) was an ableist.
Not to mention Tennyson, who wrote a whole poem called “The Babbling Brook”, which I think was the origin of the expression.
I suppose this means that Wordsworth (“In every babbling brook he finds a friend”) was an ableist.
Not to mention Tennyson, who wrote a whole poem called “The Babbling Brook”, which I think was the origin of the expression.
Do try not to be tedious, Sam. Bodies of water cannot be disabled, so applying the word to them is not relevant to a discussion of ableism. How about you read up on the period in history when asylums for “the insane” were colloquially referred to as Babels?
Do try not to be tedious, Sam. Bodies of water cannot be disabled, so applying the word to them is not relevant to a discussion of ableism. How about you read up on the period in history when asylums for “the insane” were colloquially referred to as Babels?
Well, Tigtog, I’m going with the dictionary definition, which should hold no offence to anybody.
But you’ll be pleased to know that I prefer the term irritable bowel rather than spastic bowel. Far be it from me to be insensitive to the differently disabled.
Well, Tigtog, I’m going with the dictionary definition, which should hold no offence to anybody.
But you’ll be pleased to know that I prefer the term irritable bowel rather than spastic bowel. Far be it from me to be insensitive to the differently disabled.
Sam, you’re providing a very good illustration of the snarky behaviour of the sorts of people who are defending Andrew Johns, who think that just because they can’t see a problem with language that others find offensive, it must mean that there is no problem and the others are just being silly.
Sam, you’re providing a very good illustration of the snarky behaviour of the sorts of people who are defending Andrew Johns, who think that just because they can’t see a problem with language that others find offensive, it must mean that there is no problem and the others are just being silly.
PC, there is a reasonable person test that can be used here. No reasonable person would not find what Johns said to be offensive. But it is possible that a reasonable person will not be offended by babble.
PC, there is a reasonable person test that can be used here. No reasonable person would not find what Johns said to be offensive. But it is possible that a reasonable person will not be offended by babble.
But Sam, I don’t agree that all reasonable people are the same reasonable people. I’m not offended by ‘babble’ either, but I know that Tigtog knows a great deal more than I do about disability advocacy, and am therefore prepared to take her word for it and be more careful in future. To learn something from her, in fact. Telling someone they’re babbling is indeed, on reflection, an implication that they have an intellectual disorder of some kind. Saying that to someone as an insult isn’t good.
I’m reminded of something (and am offering it as an analogy) that Christopher Hitchens once wrote, something I now know almost by heart, about discovering at the age of 38 that his mother, and therefore he, was Jewish:
But Sam, I don’t agree that all reasonable people are the same reasonable people. I’m not offended by ‘babble’ either, but I know that Tigtog knows a great deal more than I do about disability advocacy, and am therefore prepared to take her word for it and be more careful in future. To learn something from her, in fact. Telling someone they’re babbling is indeed, on reflection, an implication that they have an intellectual disorder of some kind. Saying that to someone as an insult isn’t good.
I’m reminded of something (and am offering it as an analogy) that Christopher Hitchens once wrote, something I now know almost by heart, about discovering at the age of 38 that his mother, and therefore he, was Jewish:
FB – “I suspect PB, that tigtog is arguing that “babbling” presupposes a disordered or inferior mind — which could be to set up categories of the normal/subnormal on which to trade in one’s standing.”
Isn’t it equally ableist to think that a disordered mind is a negative thing?
I don’t really see the point in speculating about what another moderator intended. Personally, I think “babbling” as an ableist value judgement is a stretch, but to me that’s a separate issue as to whether it’s offensive or not. A word is offensive when someone says they are offended, noone gets to arbitrate about what is “reasonable” in such a scenario. Regardless, no one actually said they were offended, did they?
FB – “I suspect PB, that tigtog is arguing that “babbling” presupposes a disordered or inferior mind — which could be to set up categories of the normal/subnormal on which to trade in one’s standing.”
Isn’t it equally ableist to think that a disordered mind is a negative thing?
I don’t really see the point in speculating about what another moderator intended. Personally, I think “babbling” as an ableist value judgement is a stretch, but to me that’s a separate issue as to whether it’s offensive or not. A word is offensive when someone says they are offended, noone gets to arbitrate about what is “reasonable” in such a scenario. Regardless, no one actually said they were offended, did they?
There is nothing ableist about using medical/scientific terms accurately to refer to a condition for the purposes of professional description. Were I actually suffering from a spastic bowel ie a bowel in acute spasm, I would much rather that everybody called it what it was rather than referring to it by the name of another condition entirely. I suspect I’d get more accurate treatment by doing so.
It is the way that such terms get colloquially coopted as terms of abuse that becomes a problem.
PC’s said all that needs to be said here.
Obviously people who are ignorant that a word can be used in a derogatory way are not going to offended by it. But once you know that others do use it to slur others, and that those slurred by it consequentially find its unthinking usage hurtful, then why not find an alternative, amongst the plethora of words offered by the English language, that doesn’t perturb those people?
Tennyson and Wordsworth are perfectly safe from any harm whatsoever to their reputations as poets from the simple observation that, like so many others of their age, they routinely used language that was unreflexively judgemental of those less fortunate than themselves.
There is nothing ableist about using medical/scientific terms accurately to refer to a condition for the purposes of professional description. Were I actually suffering from a spastic bowel ie a bowel in acute spasm, I would much rather that everybody called it what it was rather than referring to it by the name of another condition entirely. I suspect I’d get more accurate treatment by doing so.
It is the way that such terms get colloquially coopted as terms of abuse that becomes a problem.
PC’s said all that needs to be said here.
Obviously people who are ignorant that a word can be used in a derogatory way are not going to offended by it. But once you know that others do use it to slur others, and that those slurred by it consequentially find its unthinking usage hurtful, then why not find an alternative, amongst the plethora of words offered by the English language, that doesn’t perturb those people?
Tennyson and Wordsworth are perfectly safe from any harm whatsoever to their reputations as poets from the simple observation that, like so many others of their age, they routinely used language that was unreflexively judgemental of those less fortunate than themselves.
@Saint Furious,
You’re not seriously pretending that we live in a world that doesn’t regard mental illness as a stigma, are you?
@Saint Furious,
You’re not seriously pretending that we live in a world that doesn’t regard mental illness as a stigma, are you?
What sort of host would I be, as a moderator, if I tolerated people using a term that I knew that marginalised people also in the salon would find offensive?
What sort of host would I be if I waited for those already marginalised people to find the energy and courage to actually complain?
Not much of a one, in my book.
What sort of host would I be, as a moderator, if I tolerated people using a term that I knew that marginalised people also in the salon would find offensive?
What sort of host would I be if I waited for those already marginalised people to find the energy and courage to actually complain?
Not much of a one, in my book.
“You’re not seriously pretending that we live in a world that doesn’t regard mental illness as a stigma, are you?”
Dunno, why don’t you try being a little more condescending, see if that helps.
“What sort of host would I be if I waited for those already marginalised people to find the energy and courage to actually complain?”
Well to be honest, I’m not sure I trust you to decide on such matters. Pavlov’s Cat knows you differently, and no doubt better, than me.
In the context of explaining that Libtard may be derived from bastard and not retard, you seem to hint that this lessened the offense of the word – so is the othering of illegitimate children – and the people who give birth to them okay..? Just so long as they don’t have a mental “impairment”?
Oh, and I think my brain is quite disordered, I like it that way, but I also can’t make sense of Ron’s stream of consciousness poetry – [I am hoping this description does not offend Liam's beret].
“You’re not seriously pretending that we live in a world that doesn’t regard mental illness as a stigma, are you?”
Dunno, why don’t you try being a little more condescending, see if that helps.
“What sort of host would I be if I waited for those already marginalised people to find the energy and courage to actually complain?”
Well to be honest, I’m not sure I trust you to decide on such matters. Pavlov’s Cat knows you differently, and no doubt better, than me.
In the context of explaining that Libtard may be derived from bastard and not retard, you seem to hint that this lessened the offense of the word – so is the othering of illegitimate children – and the people who give birth to them okay..? Just so long as they don’t have a mental “impairment”?
Oh, and I think my brain is quite disordered, I like it that way, but I also can’t make sense of Ron’s stream of consciousness poetry – [I am hoping this description does not offend Liam's beret].
Tigtog
#111
“I have no idea what either of those sentences is supposed to mean. They are just word salad. Please clarify.”
do not understand ‘salad’ word as you used it but assume you did not understand my point
Well i disagreed with your view Tahu actions were Tahu launching a crusade for all aboriginees i beleived Tahu acted on instant instinct of his personel immediate feelings of disgust at andrew Johns words , and withdrew from SOO on that
Michael Ling in aFL had been subject to racist slurs on th ground prevous , but has acknowledged that his reaction to a racist dig by Monkhurst was not pre dertermined , and not for aboriginee people but an instant reaction of disgust at that time This is is what Tahu did
Had Foau or aboriginee star Inglis felt Tahu’s action was a cruscade as you felt , and a cruscade was necessary or justified , they would hav also withdrawn
Later I addressed basic issue of Host’s story
Which is why I mentioned respect aboriginee legend Artie Beetson has for Johns , so obvous Beeson does not regard Johns as knowingly racist
Then I relatd that Aboriginee coach of La Perouse footy team (Troy Ruggless) invited Johns to coach there team AFTER public exposure
Again Ruggless clearly thinks Johns is not knowingly racist
In fact aboriginee coach Ruggless said he and aboriginal players were HONORED to hav Johns coach them
Ruggless then said “What happened with the NSW team was obviously very regretable. People get pumped up in rugby league and say things like ‘go and smash that red-headed bastard’ and stuff like that.”
Troy Ruggless is rite , and that what is behind Artie Beetson’s respect for Andrew Johns as well , all three talk lingo and play in that environment , and do not see it as racist remarks at all
My point was to accept context of coments as not knowingly racist in such an environment , and once accepting cuse of problam then work for solutions in education to change that environment , but not by Public vilificaton Tahu is an eg of a person so ofended , and there would be othrs silently offended , whereas others see nothing wrong because its normal Rugby lingo (in a bubble)
Tigtog
#111
“I have no idea what either of those sentences is supposed to mean. They are just word salad. Please clarify.”
do not understand ‘salad’ word as you used it but assume you did not understand my point
Well i disagreed with your view Tahu actions were Tahu launching a crusade for all aboriginees i beleived Tahu acted on instant instinct of his personel immediate feelings of disgust at andrew Johns words , and withdrew from SOO on that
Michael Ling in aFL had been subject to racist slurs on th ground prevous , but has acknowledged that his reaction to a racist dig by Monkhurst was not pre dertermined , and not for aboriginee people but an instant reaction of disgust at that time This is is what Tahu did
Had Foau or aboriginee star Inglis felt Tahu’s action was a cruscade as you felt , and a cruscade was necessary or justified , they would hav also withdrawn
Later I addressed basic issue of Host’s story
Which is why I mentioned respect aboriginee legend Artie Beetson has for Johns , so obvous Beeson does not regard Johns as knowingly racist
Then I relatd that Aboriginee coach of La Perouse footy team (Troy Ruggless) invited Johns to coach there team AFTER public exposure
Again Ruggless clearly thinks Johns is not knowingly racist
In fact aboriginee coach Ruggless said he and aboriginal players were HONORED to hav Johns coach them
Ruggless then said “What happened with the NSW team was obviously very regretable. People get pumped up in rugby league and say things like ‘go and smash that red-headed bastard’ and stuff like that.”
Troy Ruggless is rite , and that what is behind Artie Beetson’s respect for Andrew Johns as well , all three talk lingo and play in that environment , and do not see it as racist remarks at all
My point was to accept context of coments as not knowingly racist in such an environment , and once accepting cuse of problam then work for solutions in education to change that environment , but not by Public vilificaton Tahu is an eg of a person so ofended , and there would be othrs silently offended , whereas others see nothing wrong because its normal Rugby lingo (in a bubble)
Saint Furious, I trust tigtog more than I trust myself.
And FWIW I didn’t complain about Fran’s use of “babble”. I don’t recall it happening.
Ron, as I recall, Artie Beetson said he had always found Johns respectful. In other words Beetson is speaking from his own personal experience of Johns. I don’t believe you can impute any other reason.
Tahu’s “statement” was to withdraw himself from a situation where it was thought to be OK to make remarks of the kind that Johns did. He was perfectly entitled to do that and you have no right to say that he should have acted differently.
Tahu didn’t go to the press and to say that he vilified Johns is, I think, to go too far.
Gordon Tallis said that he personally would have fronted Johns, but he accepts Tahu’s right to do what he did.
Saint Furious, I trust tigtog more than I trust myself.
And FWIW I didn’t complain about Fran’s use of “babble”. I don’t recall it happening.
Ron, as I recall, Artie Beetson said he had always found Johns respectful. In other words Beetson is speaking from his own personal experience of Johns. I don’t believe you can impute any other reason.
Tahu’s “statement” was to withdraw himself from a situation where it was thought to be OK to make remarks of the kind that Johns did. He was perfectly entitled to do that and you have no right to say that he should have acted differently.
Tahu didn’t go to the press and to say that he vilified Johns is, I think, to go too far.
Gordon Tallis said that he personally would have fronted Johns, but he accepts Tahu’s right to do what he did.
@Ron
Why can’t he be BOTH personally disgusted AND taking a stand for other indigenous players?
This just doesn’t follow. They have their own reasons for their own decisions, and what they decide to do is no proof of whether or not they think Tahu is doing the right thing.
Inglis in the Australian indicated that one of the reasons he played so super-hard was to hit back against the slurs:
So Inglis made a different decision about how to deal with the slurs. He certainly doesn’t say that they aren’t a problem, he clearly says he was upset by them.
Whether he is knowingly racist or not is very much a secondary issue. The words are racist whether Johns thinks he’s “just having a joke” or not. This casual usage of racist slurs as “normal Rugby lingo”, as if they don’t matter and don’t hurt those who are slurred, needs to stop.
You assume that Tahu has never tried to do this. You assume that if he did do this it would be accepted. You also keep on saying that Tahu has publicly vilified Johns. Has Tahu ever said that Johns himself was a racist? Not that I have read. Tahu’s actions indicate that he finds Johns usage of racist words unacceptable. He is right. It is.
@Ron
Why can’t he be BOTH personally disgusted AND taking a stand for other indigenous players?
This just doesn’t follow. They have their own reasons for their own decisions, and what they decide to do is no proof of whether or not they think Tahu is doing the right thing.
Inglis in the Australian indicated that one of the reasons he played so super-hard was to hit back against the slurs:
So Inglis made a different decision about how to deal with the slurs. He certainly doesn’t say that they aren’t a problem, he clearly says he was upset by them.
Whether he is knowingly racist or not is very much a secondary issue. The words are racist whether Johns thinks he’s “just having a joke” or not. This casual usage of racist slurs as “normal Rugby lingo”, as if they don’t matter and don’t hurt those who are slurred, needs to stop.
You assume that Tahu has never tried to do this. You assume that if he did do this it would be accepted. You also keep on saying that Tahu has publicly vilified Johns. Has Tahu ever said that Johns himself was a racist? Not that I have read. Tahu’s actions indicate that he finds Johns usage of racist words unacceptable. He is right. It is.
@Saint Furious
As if your disingenuous comment wasn’t condescending. To be blunt, whether you personally trust me or not is essentially academic. I’m a moderator here, so such things are my call.
My, grandmama, what a long memory you have? It is more OK, because times have changed. Bastardy used to be a stigma and a genuine disadvantage (e.g. no inheritance). The fact that nobody cares any more whether somebody’s parents are married or not, which happened pretty rapidly once de facto partnerships were legally recognised as conferring spousal rights and the law was changed so that illegitimate children can now sue for their inheritance rights, is what makes the word essentially a historical curiosity. I have no idea whether the parents of my kids’ friends are married or not, it’s an irrelevance.
Whereas people with disabilities are still routinely discriminated against, every single day. As are people of colour. Times have not changed enough to make either of those statuses irrelevant to enough other people. That does make a difference to the power of a word.
@Brian, thank you for the vote of confidence. I appreciate it.
@Saint Furious
As if your disingenuous comment wasn’t condescending. To be blunt, whether you personally trust me or not is essentially academic. I’m a moderator here, so such things are my call.
My, grandmama, what a long memory you have? It is more OK, because times have changed. Bastardy used to be a stigma and a genuine disadvantage (e.g. no inheritance). The fact that nobody cares any more whether somebody’s parents are married or not, which happened pretty rapidly once de facto partnerships were legally recognised as conferring spousal rights and the law was changed so that illegitimate children can now sue for their inheritance rights, is what makes the word essentially a historical curiosity. I have no idea whether the parents of my kids’ friends are married or not, it’s an irrelevance.
Whereas people with disabilities are still routinely discriminated against, every single day. As are people of colour. Times have not changed enough to make either of those statuses irrelevant to enough other people. That does make a difference to the power of a word.
@Brian, thank you for the vote of confidence. I appreciate it.
Okay. well, I’m “marginalised”.(Like hell I am! telling me that or any disabled person that uis very, very offensive.) I’m a spastic. I have mild cerebral palsy which includes a minor speech defect which is particularly evident when I’m tired or speaking excitedly, the latter being something I’m prone to do. As a spastic I find it highly offensive that disability advocates should tell me about terms of speech that should or should not be offensive.
] If people do say something really offensive to me about my disability I either take it up with them or pretend I’m stupid. It depends how I feel at the time.
Let me tell you all what is really offensive to some-one who is disabled the way I am – and these are things I’ve been subject to all my life.
People feel uncomfortable when they’re with you because they find it hard to be comfortable in your presence or are embarrased to be with you. People who are rejecting me because I’m disabled, but use other reasons, eg too eccentric, unconventional, poor dress sense, etc, etc. (Though I do at times have a penchant for picking unusual clothes.) Speaking to me very slowly because they think I’m intellectually disabled because I’m spastiv, when in fact, and I hate to blow my own trumpet here, I’m very, very bright. People being astounded I can say something intelligent.
I’ve learnt to ignore people mocking my gait and palsied arm (which again is much more noticeable when I’m tired) as they’re mostly ignorant teenagers. Apart from when I call myself spastic I haven’t been called spastic conmtemptuously since my school days. (Given my right arm is immensely strong a swift right uppercut and a few kicks with the leg that had calipers on it soon put an end to thst. [I am 65
Advantages of being spastic – you can get into pubs when you’re really drunk, people give up their seats on buses and trains, people leave you alone, women trust you more (which I used to outrageous advantage once I realised it as a young fellow.) I could go on, but I won’t.
Now re Ron. (Sincere apologies, Ron, if I’m wrong) Have any of you considered he might be dyslectic or, like me, visually impaired.? The fact that he has something to say and choses to say it here, should be enough.
Apologies to any of you if I’ve offended anyone in the abovebecause I truly know your hearts are in the right place.
Re ‘babble’ – Barnaby Joyce babbles. Kevin Rudd babbles when he gets into technocratic jargon.
Re ‘nargardly’ – it means miserly, or parsimonious. It has absolutely nothing to do with the N word.
Sam, your various justifications of racism stink.
Okay. well, I’m “marginalised”.(Like hell I am! telling me that or any disabled person that uis very, very offensive.) I’m a spastic. I have mild cerebral palsy which includes a minor speech defect which is particularly evident when I’m tired or speaking excitedly, the latter being something I’m prone to do. As a spastic I find it highly offensive that disability advocates should tell me about terms of speech that should or should not be offensive.
] If people do say something really offensive to me about my disability I either take it up with them or pretend I’m stupid. It depends how I feel at the time.
Let me tell you all what is really offensive to some-one who is disabled the way I am – and these are things I’ve been subject to all my life.
People feel uncomfortable when they’re with you because they find it hard to be comfortable in your presence or are embarrased to be with you. People who are rejecting me because I’m disabled, but use other reasons, eg too eccentric, unconventional, poor dress sense, etc, etc. (Though I do at times have a penchant for picking unusual clothes.) Speaking to me very slowly because they think I’m intellectually disabled because I’m spastiv, when in fact, and I hate to blow my own trumpet here, I’m very, very bright. People being astounded I can say something intelligent.
I’ve learnt to ignore people mocking my gait and palsied arm (which again is much more noticeable when I’m tired) as they’re mostly ignorant teenagers. Apart from when I call myself spastic I haven’t been called spastic conmtemptuously since my school days. (Given my right arm is immensely strong a swift right uppercut and a few kicks with the leg that had calipers on it soon put an end to thst. [I am 65
Advantages of being spastic – you can get into pubs when you’re really drunk, people give up their seats on buses and trains, people leave you alone, women trust you more (which I used to outrageous advantage once I realised it as a young fellow.) I could go on, but I won’t.
Now re Ron. (Sincere apologies, Ron, if I’m wrong) Have any of you considered he might be dyslectic or, like me, visually impaired.? The fact that he has something to say and choses to say it here, should be enough.
Apologies to any of you if I’ve offended anyone in the abovebecause I truly know your hearts are in the right place.
Re ‘babble’ – Barnaby Joyce babbles. Kevin Rudd babbles when he gets into technocratic jargon.
Re ‘nargardly’ – it means miserly, or parsimonious. It has absolutely nothing to do with the N word.
Sam, your various justifications of racism stink.
The fact that NSW seem to have played an extra-dirty game indicates to me that all of the apologies were meaningless and as is so often is the case with those incapable of self-reflection, they see themselves as unfairly victimised. The contrast with the very dignified behaviour of Inglis and Tahu is stark. I don’t follow the game generally but I am very glad my home state won that game.
The fact that NSW seem to have played an extra-dirty game indicates to me that all of the apologies were meaningless and as is so often is the case with those incapable of self-reflection, they see themselves as unfairly victimised. The contrast with the very dignified behaviour of Inglis and Tahu is stark. I don’t follow the game generally but I am very glad my home state won that game.
Re: niggardly
For the record, the Swedish term for “close” or “careful” (which sometimes carries the implication of being somewhat tight-fisted, but also sometimes means “particular” in the sense we usually mean “picky”) is noggrann which is nothing like the Swedish word svart for black but somewhat like niggardly in appearance.
Of course with language, it is not merely a question of what is said, but what your audience thinks you are saying. If they think you are saying something that demeans them and this is not your intent or represents your message in an unhelpful context, then you need to take account of this in framing what you say. This holds even if you think your audience is not entitled to make the imputations they might, because communication always involves an attempt at a meeting of the minds of at least two distinct parties.
Re: niggardly
For the record, the Swedish term for “close” or “careful” (which sometimes carries the implication of being somewhat tight-fisted, but also sometimes means “particular” in the sense we usually mean “picky”) is noggrann which is nothing like the Swedish word svart for black but somewhat like niggardly in appearance.
Of course with language, it is not merely a question of what is said, but what your audience thinks you are saying. If they think you are saying something that demeans them and this is not your intent or represents your message in an unhelpful context, then you need to take account of this in framing what you say. This holds even if you think your audience is not entitled to make the imputations they might, because communication always involves an attempt at a meeting of the minds of at least two distinct parties.
Impressions on this can be subjective, but I’ve had several people volunteer this.
Darius Boyd said that it was the sprigs on his back that worried him rather than the spear tackle.
It seemed that Beau Scott tried to needle Inglis into blowing up. Nearly succeeded. Scott plays for the Dragons and Bennett wouldn’t be coaching him to play that way. The fact that he did on Wednesday suggests that it was part of a plan.
Paul Gallen and Luke O’Donnell both have a reputation for rough play and were no doubt selected to put more aggression into the NSW pack. In the past Carl Webb has arguably been selected for Qld for the same reason. The risk is that it leads to penalties and on Wednesday penalties favoured Qld 8-3. That alone can kill you in the modern game. At one stage it was 5-1 and by that time the game was gone.
NSW also repeatedly kicked high ball to Folau, presumably thinking his head would be elsewhere and he’d drop the ball. Dumb strategy as it turned out. Delicious that Inglis scores the first try and Folau the second.
Impressions on this can be subjective, but I’ve had several people volunteer this.
Darius Boyd said that it was the sprigs on his back that worried him rather than the spear tackle.
It seemed that Beau Scott tried to needle Inglis into blowing up. Nearly succeeded. Scott plays for the Dragons and Bennett wouldn’t be coaching him to play that way. The fact that he did on Wednesday suggests that it was part of a plan.
Paul Gallen and Luke O’Donnell both have a reputation for rough play and were no doubt selected to put more aggression into the NSW pack. In the past Carl Webb has arguably been selected for Qld for the same reason. The risk is that it leads to penalties and on Wednesday penalties favoured Qld 8-3. That alone can kill you in the modern game. At one stage it was 5-1 and by that time the game was gone.
NSW also repeatedly kicked high ball to Folau, presumably thinking his head would be elsewhere and he’d drop the ball. Dumb strategy as it turned out. Delicious that Inglis scores the first try and Folau the second.
This holds even if you think your audience is not entitled to make the imputations they might because communication always involves an attempt at a meeting of the minds of at least two distinct parties.”
There have been cases (certainly in England, maybe elsewhere as well)of pediatricians being physically attacked because people confused the word with pedophile. IMO, the onus did not fall on the attackees to properly communicate to the attackers that they were doctors, not predators, of children.
This was so even though some people feel very strongly about pedophiles and their activities.
This holds even if you think your audience is not entitled to make the imputations they might because communication always involves an attempt at a meeting of the minds of at least two distinct parties.”
There have been cases (certainly in England, maybe elsewhere as well)of pediatricians being physically attacked because people confused the word with pedophile. IMO, the onus did not fall on the attackees to properly communicate to the attackers that they were doctors, not predators, of children.
This was so even though some people feel very strongly about pedophiles and their activities.
Fran, well said. That’s spot on.
And I would trust Tigs over many many people I know far far better. Of course, while we are at it, I admire those feathers too, beyond all reason.
Fran, well said. That’s spot on.
And I would trust Tigs over many many people I know far far better. Of course, while we are at it, I admire those feathers too, beyond all reason.
Sam argued:
I’d say that if paediatricians or others had a presentiment that sections of the people they were talking to might make such an inference, they ought to clarify almost in the same place. You say such things have occurred, and I cannot say they haven’t*, but however that may be, the question is surely — how reasonable is it for the person using the term to suppose that someone listening might make an unfounded inference about the terminology being used?
The word retard for example, is almost always intended to derogate and so anyone attempting to use it in any other way — presumably in a clinical context, would be expected to know this context. In 1977, when I was working at Rydalmere Psychiatric Hospital, we used to take shifts over at “the retard centre” on the other side of Victoria Road. In those days the term wasn’t deprecated as it is now. The cultural discourse has changed since then.
If it became the case that the term paediatrician were widely confused with paedophile I daresay paediatricans would be clamouring for a new title.
*this claim seems to be in some dispute
All of the references seem to be to this once incident in South Wales affecting a paediatrican called Yvette Cloete in August 2000.
Sam argued:
I’d say that if paediatricians or others had a presentiment that sections of the people they were talking to might make such an inference, they ought to clarify almost in the same place. You say such things have occurred, and I cannot say they haven’t*, but however that may be, the question is surely — how reasonable is it for the person using the term to suppose that someone listening might make an unfounded inference about the terminology being used?
The word retard for example, is almost always intended to derogate and so anyone attempting to use it in any other way — presumably in a clinical context, would be expected to know this context. In 1977, when I was working at Rydalmere Psychiatric Hospital, we used to take shifts over at “the retard centre” on the other side of Victoria Road. In those days the term wasn’t deprecated as it is now. The cultural discourse has changed since then.
If it became the case that the term paediatrician were widely confused with paedophile I daresay paediatricans would be clamouring for a new title.
*this claim seems to be in some dispute
All of the references seem to be to this once incident in South Wales affecting a paediatrican called Yvette Cloete in August 2000.
Yes.
But of course, Paul, by your own argument, you may have offended him dreadfully by saying so.
Yes.
But of course, Paul, by your own argument, you may have offended him dreadfully by saying so.
Timana Tahu has spoken with NRL chief executive David Gallop.
Gallop said:
Tahu wants real change, not a quick apology and back to work, as it were.
Timana Tahu has spoken with NRL chief executive David Gallop.
Gallop said:
Tahu wants real change, not a quick apology and back to work, as it were.
Fran,
Given the breadth of the audience of a public forum on the internet I don’t think it’s reasonable at all to expect people to consider all potential ‘unfounded inferences’ of the terminology they use. All parties share responsibility for clear communication; any false inferences formed as a result of ignorance, uncharitable interpretations or false assumptions for resolving ambiguities is the responsibility of the ignorant, uncharitable or assuming person (and this can either be the writer/speaker or the reader/listener).
If a particular use of a term causes unintended offense then there are two errors being made. First the use of the term without the appropriate context and second the misinterpretation of the use of the term. The writer/speaker should ensure they appropriately contextualise the term before using it to prevent misinterpretation, and the reader/listener should be prepared to accept that use of the term.
Fran,
Given the breadth of the audience of a public forum on the internet I don’t think it’s reasonable at all to expect people to consider all potential ‘unfounded inferences’ of the terminology they use. All parties share responsibility for clear communication; any false inferences formed as a result of ignorance, uncharitable interpretations or false assumptions for resolving ambiguities is the responsibility of the ignorant, uncharitable or assuming person (and this can either be the writer/speaker or the reader/listener).
If a particular use of a term causes unintended offense then there are two errors being made. First the use of the term without the appropriate context and second the misinterpretation of the use of the term. The writer/speaker should ensure they appropriately contextualise the term before using it to prevent misinterpretation, and the reader/listener should be prepared to accept that use of the term.
@desipis
Or you have designated moderators. Who make guidelines and remind people to look at them. And as a general rule ask for questions about moderation to be resolved in email.
I offered a speculation about why another moderator asked a commentor to check the comments policy regarding their use of a particular word, and I think that some of the resulting discussion about ableist language has been a worthwhile parallel and extension to the thread topic of racist language.
@Paul B,
Then what is the remedy when I know other people with disabilities who object to a term that doesn’t bother you? My instinct is to go to bat for the ones who say it is hurting them, since if you say it doeesn’t hurt you then you don’t need my bat on your team right now. (ETA: also, pointing out that others find it hurtful doesn’t mean that anybody else should feel exactly the same way – but why is the reaction to people saying that they are hurt by words so often a vehement refusal to show a bit of consideration to them?)
As to society marginalising PWDs – this happens every single day, many of them loudly point it out and denounce it and demand that others realise they are doing it and that they should damn well stop doing it. You even listed some examples of how it has happened to you, such as the assumptions made about your intelligence etc because of your CP – that’s textbook marginalisation.
BTW, most disability advocates I know are disabled in some way. Including me. Is it OK with you if I speak for my fellow PWDs who don’t feel the same way that you do?
@desipis
Or you have designated moderators. Who make guidelines and remind people to look at them. And as a general rule ask for questions about moderation to be resolved in email.
I offered a speculation about why another moderator asked a commentor to check the comments policy regarding their use of a particular word, and I think that some of the resulting discussion about ableist language has been a worthwhile parallel and extension to the thread topic of racist language.
@Paul B,
Then what is the remedy when I know other people with disabilities who object to a term that doesn’t bother you? My instinct is to go to bat for the ones who say it is hurting them, since if you say it doeesn’t hurt you then you don’t need my bat on your team right now. (ETA: also, pointing out that others find it hurtful doesn’t mean that anybody else should feel exactly the same way – but why is the reaction to people saying that they are hurt by words so often a vehement refusal to show a bit of consideration to them?)
As to society marginalising PWDs – this happens every single day, many of them loudly point it out and denounce it and demand that others realise they are doing it and that they should damn well stop doing it. You even listed some examples of how it has happened to you, such as the assumptions made about your intelligence etc because of your CP – that’s textbook marginalisation.
BTW, most disability advocates I know are disabled in some way. Including me. Is it OK with you if I speak for my fellow PWDs who don’t feel the same way that you do?
@Brian, thanks for posting the link about Tahu meeting Gallop.
Yep – this was very clear from what was being said by the NRL officials right from the start in response to Tahu’s walkout after he spoke to somebody senior about why he was going. I think he has been absolutely right not to speak to the media himself – that would end up making it unavoidably personal and the larger message about a toxic culture awash with casual racism in Aussie sport would be diluted.
@Brian, thanks for posting the link about Tahu meeting Gallop.
Yep – this was very clear from what was being said by the NRL officials right from the start in response to Tahu’s walkout after he spoke to somebody senior about why he was going. I think he has been absolutely right not to speak to the media himself – that would end up making it unavoidably personal and the larger message about a toxic culture awash with casual racism in Aussie sport would be diluted.
While it is fair to say, Desipis, that a failure to achieve a meeting of the minds entails a failure both on the part of the author of a communication and those receiving the message. Yet on technical and operational feasibility grounds, it is the author who must take responsibility for authoring the message. Ideally, the receivers, if they misapprehend (or even if they make a contextually reasonable inference that was unintended by the message author) engage constructively with the author to resolve the matter. The rules governing these exchanges can be called protocols — a form of metalanguage within which speech acts can be evaluated.
In practice, a speaker will often have no more than an imprecise grasp of his or her audience and so the speaker who wants to achieve that meeting of the minds should reflect at least upon the impact of these protocols before uttering, notwithstanding that he or she (as in my case with “babbling”) might yet slip up.
While it is fair to say, Desipis, that a failure to achieve a meeting of the minds entails a failure both on the part of the author of a communication and those receiving the message. Yet on technical and operational feasibility grounds, it is the author who must take responsibility for authoring the message. Ideally, the receivers, if they misapprehend (or even if they make a contextually reasonable inference that was unintended by the message author) engage constructively with the author to resolve the matter. The rules governing these exchanges can be called protocols — a form of metalanguage within which speech acts can be evaluated.
In practice, a speaker will often have no more than an imprecise grasp of his or her audience and so the speaker who wants to achieve that meeting of the minds should reflect at least upon the impact of these protocols before uttering, notwithstanding that he or she (as in my case with “babbling”) might yet slip up.
BRIAN
“He was perfectly entitled to do that and you have NO right to say that he should have acted differently.”
Wrong , I certainly do
Furthermore you contrdicted by then saying
“Gordon Tallis said that he personally would have fronted Johns, but he accepts Tahu’s right to do what he did.”
My views and Gordon Tallis’s identical
TIGTOG
regarding Inglis’s non withdrawal
“So Inglis made a different decision about how to deal with the slurs. He certainly doesn’t say that they aren’t a problem, he clearly says he was upset by them.”
I agree !
I feel you still misunderstand my point and feel “somehow” i’m mitigating Johns reactions or implying consent by Inglis/Folau of Johns remarks
Johns remarks WERE disgusting fullstop , so of couse Tigtog those remarks greatly upset Inglis (and Folau) !
But Inglis/Folau , like Gordon Tallis saw how how to react to it quite diferently to Tahu who made a personel decision to actualy withdraw on spur of moment on instinct Its a natural reaction , what is unnatural I feels is your view it was a delib Tahu crusade
None of Inglis/Folau saw a public crusade required by them joining it , which is why they themselves did not withdraw in suport
Tallis in fact says he would hav personaly fronted Johns
Therefore Tigtog your view of
“Whether he is knowingly racist or not is very much a secondary issue.”
misses underlinying issue here , it is th KEY issue and is not a secondary one Which is why i highlited cultural environment of Rugby League that most players aboriginee islanders and othrs accepted as normal lingo and my statment of this got misunderstood as my condoning but this is reality
This point seems to get lost , as I repeatedly said education was solution (think ARL should initiate it)
BRIAN
“He was perfectly entitled to do that and you have NO right to say that he should have acted differently.”
Wrong , I certainly do
Furthermore you contrdicted by then saying
“Gordon Tallis said that he personally would have fronted Johns, but he accepts Tahu’s right to do what he did.”
My views and Gordon Tallis’s identical
TIGTOG
regarding Inglis’s non withdrawal
“So Inglis made a different decision about how to deal with the slurs. He certainly doesn’t say that they aren’t a problem, he clearly says he was upset by them.”
I agree !
I feel you still misunderstand my point and feel “somehow” i’m mitigating Johns reactions or implying consent by Inglis/Folau of Johns remarks
Johns remarks WERE disgusting fullstop , so of couse Tigtog those remarks greatly upset Inglis (and Folau) !
But Inglis/Folau , like Gordon Tallis saw how how to react to it quite diferently to Tahu who made a personel decision to actualy withdraw on spur of moment on instinct Its a natural reaction , what is unnatural I feels is your view it was a delib Tahu crusade
None of Inglis/Folau saw a public crusade required by them joining it , which is why they themselves did not withdraw in suport
Tallis in fact says he would hav personaly fronted Johns
Therefore Tigtog your view of
“Whether he is knowingly racist or not is very much a secondary issue.”
misses underlinying issue here , it is th KEY issue and is not a secondary one Which is why i highlited cultural environment of Rugby League that most players aboriginee islanders and othrs accepted as normal lingo and my statment of this got misunderstood as my condoning but this is reality
This point seems to get lost , as I repeatedly said education was solution (think ARL should initiate it)
Robert Dipierdomenico joins the Roll of Dishonour.
Robert Dipierdomenico joins the Roll of Dishonour.
tigtog,
Apologies for any offence, was not meant, not that’s any excuse, because frequently offence is unintentional. I’m aware of marginalisation, but, like other PWD I don’t accept it. My attitude to my own disability is people who mix with me socially accept the disability and all that comes with it, including my sometimes quirky personality. If they don’t I can do without them.
I don’t normally get into discussions about this (cancer, yes, but CP, no.) The main reason for that is because for me disability is the norm because I was born that way. In my own head, I don’t see myself as disabled, except when I used to do things that were beyond me that I should never have tried in the first place, like rock-climbing, and that was one terrifying experience, I can tell you. It took me years to even get around to applying for the disability pension, which only came about because I ended up more or less crippled for a few days after going on two long bus rides to and from a job interview.
I accept your reasoning in your reply to me, but am always a bit wary about its over-application to language. I believe in common courtesy and its only because for the most part good manners have disappeared from our society that at times we’ve had to push for more inclusive language, but sometimes that inclusiveness reaches the point of ridiculousness. (Not that there hasn’t always been prejudice on grounds of race, gender, disability, sexuality etc, but that’s the world we live in and whether we like it or not its never going to go away completely. That’s just the way it is.It doesn’t matter how often we complain about it. I know that’s a pretty dark view to have of humanity, but there it is.{
PC @ 141, I did make the observation with an apology in advance.
tigtog,
Apologies for any offence, was not meant, not that’s any excuse, because frequently offence is unintentional. I’m aware of marginalisation, but, like other PWD I don’t accept it. My attitude to my own disability is people who mix with me socially accept the disability and all that comes with it, including my sometimes quirky personality. If they don’t I can do without them.
I don’t normally get into discussions about this (cancer, yes, but CP, no.) The main reason for that is because for me disability is the norm because I was born that way. In my own head, I don’t see myself as disabled, except when I used to do things that were beyond me that I should never have tried in the first place, like rock-climbing, and that was one terrifying experience, I can tell you. It took me years to even get around to applying for the disability pension, which only came about because I ended up more or less crippled for a few days after going on two long bus rides to and from a job interview.
I accept your reasoning in your reply to me, but am always a bit wary about its over-application to language. I believe in common courtesy and its only because for the most part good manners have disappeared from our society that at times we’ve had to push for more inclusive language, but sometimes that inclusiveness reaches the point of ridiculousness. (Not that there hasn’t always been prejudice on grounds of race, gender, disability, sexuality etc, but that’s the world we live in and whether we like it or not its never going to go away completely. That’s just the way it is.It doesn’t matter how often we complain about it. I know that’s a pretty dark view to have of humanity, but there it is.{
PC @ 141, I did make the observation with an apology in advance.
Ron (it is “Ron isn’t it and not “Rom”?), you have a right to an opinion on how Tahu should have acted, but you seem to be saying that Tahu acted incorrectly. That isn’t your right to decide. Tahu was perfectly entitled to make the choice that he did. Can you accept that?
Ask yourself, if Tahu had done it your way, would we be talking about it on this thread? Would David Gallop be thinking about what the NRL should do so that others don’t have to put up with this kind of thing in the future?
Also it wasn’t only Inglis and Folau. There was Willie Tonga, Johnathon Thurston, Sam Thaiday, and I think Neville Costigan in the Qld team, plus Jarryd Hayne, and Tom Learoyd-Lars in the NSW team, if you extend it to all with Melanesian/Polynesian heritage also.
Whatever he did or didn’t mean, Andrew Johns was an ignorant klutz and ignorance is not an excuse if you want to fill positions of responsibility.
Leave it to others. The Channel 9 commentary lacked nothing by having Brad Fittler instead of Johns, although he too has been known to do some very dumb things in the past. Mostly when off his head with drink.
Ron (it is “Ron isn’t it and not “Rom”?), you have a right to an opinion on how Tahu should have acted, but you seem to be saying that Tahu acted incorrectly. That isn’t your right to decide. Tahu was perfectly entitled to make the choice that he did. Can you accept that?
Ask yourself, if Tahu had done it your way, would we be talking about it on this thread? Would David Gallop be thinking about what the NRL should do so that others don’t have to put up with this kind of thing in the future?
Also it wasn’t only Inglis and Folau. There was Willie Tonga, Johnathon Thurston, Sam Thaiday, and I think Neville Costigan in the Qld team, plus Jarryd Hayne, and Tom Learoyd-Lars in the NSW team, if you extend it to all with Melanesian/Polynesian heritage also.
Whatever he did or didn’t mean, Andrew Johns was an ignorant klutz and ignorance is not an excuse if you want to fill positions of responsibility.
Leave it to others. The Channel 9 commentary lacked nothing by having Brad Fittler instead of Johns, although he too has been known to do some very dumb things in the past. Mostly when off his head with drink.
tigtog,
I f I get in the shit because of my disability some time, you’ll be the first person I contact. Seriously.
tigtog,
I f I get in the shit because of my disability some time, you’ll be the first person I contact. Seriously.
@Ron, as long as you are saying that he SHOULD have acted differently rather than he COULD have acted differently, Brian is correct: you have no right to tell him what he SHOULD do. He’s the only one who gets to make the judgement call.
And what exactly did he do that was so very wrong, really? Tahu did nothing more than withdraw from a situation that RL officials, not him personally, reported to the media as one that he found intolerable. Everything else has been from the media and other RL figures, nothing from Tahu at all other than his continued absence from the squad.
Tallis says that Tahu was right to do what he did, and you say that he wasn’t. How is that identical?
I’m saying that Tahu’s stance has become a deliberate stand against the culture of racial-sledging. I imagine that at the time he didn’t have a solid plan other than getting out of that unacceptable environment of the slurs that provoked the walkout, but it has become obvious since that he feels this is bigger than just him and any personal apology from Johns. See Brian’s news link upthread on Tahu’s discussions today with RL officials.
My point is that it is perfectly possible for people who do not consider themselves racist, who genuinely do have friends of other races and who work respectfully and productively with colleagues of other races, and who genuinely do not intend to personally offend those people in any way, to nonetheless regularly hurt people of other races by uttering words which are racist slurs in the mistaken belief that it doesn’t matter if you’re all mates having a joke. People of genuine goodwill are generally horrified when they realise the hurt that they have unwittingly caused over the years, and decide to do better in future.
Arguing over whether people really are or are not racist for unthinkingly/insensitively using words that were common parlance when they grew up is a diversion from examination of the harmful effects of the words themselves no matter what the intention of the speaker. Expecting people to grin and bear denigrating language because “no harm’s meant, it’s just a joke” is the burden that needs to be highlighted here. Whether the people playing along with “the joke” are racist or not in their hearts is their own personal burden to deal with, it’s the attitudes expressed by the words they use in public that are the issue.
@Ron, as long as you are saying that he SHOULD have acted differently rather than he COULD have acted differently, Brian is correct: you have no right to tell him what he SHOULD do. He’s the only one who gets to make the judgement call.
And what exactly did he do that was so very wrong, really? Tahu did nothing more than withdraw from a situation that RL officials, not him personally, reported to the media as one that he found intolerable. Everything else has been from the media and other RL figures, nothing from Tahu at all other than his continued absence from the squad.
Tallis says that Tahu was right to do what he did, and you say that he wasn’t. How is that identical?
I’m saying that Tahu’s stance has become a deliberate stand against the culture of racial-sledging. I imagine that at the time he didn’t have a solid plan other than getting out of that unacceptable environment of the slurs that provoked the walkout, but it has become obvious since that he feels this is bigger than just him and any personal apology from Johns. See Brian’s news link upthread on Tahu’s discussions today with RL officials.
My point is that it is perfectly possible for people who do not consider themselves racist, who genuinely do have friends of other races and who work respectfully and productively with colleagues of other races, and who genuinely do not intend to personally offend those people in any way, to nonetheless regularly hurt people of other races by uttering words which are racist slurs in the mistaken belief that it doesn’t matter if you’re all mates having a joke. People of genuine goodwill are generally horrified when they realise the hurt that they have unwittingly caused over the years, and decide to do better in future.
Arguing over whether people really are or are not racist for unthinkingly/insensitively using words that were common parlance when they grew up is a diversion from examination of the harmful effects of the words themselves no matter what the intention of the speaker. Expecting people to grin and bear denigrating language because “no harm’s meant, it’s just a joke” is the burden that needs to be highlighted here. Whether the people playing along with “the joke” are racist or not in their hearts is their own personal burden to deal with, it’s the attitudes expressed by the words they use in public that are the issue.
Thanks Paul @ 148. AFL boss Andrew Demetriou said:
The publicity given to these incidents might ensure that some of these blokes engage their brains before they speak.
Thanks Paul @ 148. AFL boss Andrew Demetriou said:
The publicity given to these incidents might ensure that some of these blokes engage their brains before they speak.
One point in all of this, to which tigtog alluded turns on what one thinks of process and goal.
In a sense, it may well be that the need to reflect on what one says and how others will take it up is probably as important as what words one finally uses. One wears language much as one wears a familiar item of clothing — a favourite blouse or pair of shoes, often giving only passing thought to why we have donned them or what others may make of our choices.
If, before we speak, we are moved to invest the time to consider our turns of phrase, both in the light of the needs of our audiences and of course, of our own objectives, this reflective engagement can be very useful. As I said on a similar matter once before, in my classes I regularly ask my students whether they have “paused” before they begin to make a contribution to discussion, by which they know that they must be able to show that they have thought about the pertinence of the comment or question, the discussion that has preceded it and how others may respond. Sometimes I stop them and ask them to show that they have done just that.
The point about inclusive language is that it is not just a goal. It is not simply the case that using language that starts from respect for the humanity of others regardless of their own particular physical, intellectual or cultural attributes is worthy. It is the case that the process of defining what such language would entail in practice, by doing the work of locating the humanity of others in their particular attributes to the extent necessary to achieve that inclusivity is worthy. It is, in broad terms, an essential part of discovering our own humanity and the nature of our connectedness to and distinction from others.
In the end, it could be that we discover, after a very long time, that at least some of the phrases in contention no longer matter, precisely because the underlying point — our common humanity — is accepted by all. That wouldn’t mean that the work of getting there was retrospectively wasteful.
One point in all of this, to which tigtog alluded turns on what one thinks of process and goal.
In a sense, it may well be that the need to reflect on what one says and how others will take it up is probably as important as what words one finally uses. One wears language much as one wears a familiar item of clothing — a favourite blouse or pair of shoes, often giving only passing thought to why we have donned them or what others may make of our choices.
If, before we speak, we are moved to invest the time to consider our turns of phrase, both in the light of the needs of our audiences and of course, of our own objectives, this reflective engagement can be very useful. As I said on a similar matter once before, in my classes I regularly ask my students whether they have “paused” before they begin to make a contribution to discussion, by which they know that they must be able to show that they have thought about the pertinence of the comment or question, the discussion that has preceded it and how others may respond. Sometimes I stop them and ask them to show that they have done just that.
The point about inclusive language is that it is not just a goal. It is not simply the case that using language that starts from respect for the humanity of others regardless of their own particular physical, intellectual or cultural attributes is worthy. It is the case that the process of defining what such language would entail in practice, by doing the work of locating the humanity of others in their particular attributes to the extent necessary to achieve that inclusivity is worthy. It is, in broad terms, an essential part of discovering our own humanity and the nature of our connectedness to and distinction from others.
In the end, it could be that we discover, after a very long time, that at least some of the phrases in contention no longer matter, precisely because the underlying point — our common humanity — is accepted by all. That wouldn’t mean that the work of getting there was retrospectively wasteful.
@Paul Burns:
Thanks Paul. No wuckas. I’ve frequently unintentionally offended others myself – I’m very much an ally-work in progress.
The unintentional aspect not excusing the offence is the point I’m trying to get Ron to see re his continued emphasis on people saying whether they believe Johns is intentionally racist or not. He doesn’t get a free pass for perhaps not intending any offence with his usage of racist slurs, so whether he meant it in a “really” racist way or not simply doesn’t matter to the debate.
I’d always be glad to help however I could, Paul – although I hope you would have resources more local to go to first who could kick up a more immediate fuss on your behalf!
@Paul Burns:
Thanks Paul. No wuckas. I’ve frequently unintentionally offended others myself – I’m very much an ally-work in progress.
The unintentional aspect not excusing the offence is the point I’m trying to get Ron to see re his continued emphasis on people saying whether they believe Johns is intentionally racist or not. He doesn’t get a free pass for perhaps not intending any offence with his usage of racist slurs, so whether he meant it in a “really” racist way or not simply doesn’t matter to the debate.
I’d always be glad to help however I could, Paul – although I hope you would have resources more local to go to first who could kick up a more immediate fuss on your behalf!
@Fran, that was a gem of elucidation. The work itself is worthy.
@Fran, that was a gem of elucidation. The work itself is worthy.
Do any of these footy dudes (‘He hasn’t got a racist bone in his body’) know what ‘racist’ actually means? I wonder if anyone’s asked them what they think it means, and what they’ve replied.
Do any of these footy dudes (‘He hasn’t got a racist bone in his body’) know what ‘racist’ actually means? I wonder if anyone’s asked them what they think it means, and what they’ve replied.
Dr Cat @ 157, they’d probably say something along the lines of, “Well, he doesn’t hate boongs, for a start.”
Dr Cat @ 157, they’d probably say something along the lines of, “Well, he doesn’t hate boongs, for a start.”
PC,
Many years ago (c mid to late 70s) when I first went to uni, there was a book on racism in Australia (a 3 volume work) covering all kinds of racism, Indigenous/Asian are the two most prominent I remember. And if I remember correctly, the definition of racism in this classic text ran to several paragraphs and the writer spent some considerable time differentiating between ‘racist’ and ‘racial’, such was the newness of the former word at the time.
Anybody wo hasn’t got a vague idea of what racism, at least in the Indigenous context, means today in OZ, hasn’t been reading the newspapers, or has been skipping some of the more informed discussions.
Now, as to the point addressed by tigtog,
My view is you doen’t have to mean to be racist. You either choose to behave in a racist way or not. Its a pretty easy choice to make. You are either a stupid, prejudiced git, or you ain’t, and if your own moral sense doesn’t tell you you’re being racist, either you’re upbringing/education (these days) is stuffed or you need a brain transplant.
PC,
Many years ago (c mid to late 70s) when I first went to uni, there was a book on racism in Australia (a 3 volume work) covering all kinds of racism, Indigenous/Asian are the two most prominent I remember. And if I remember correctly, the definition of racism in this classic text ran to several paragraphs and the writer spent some considerable time differentiating between ‘racist’ and ‘racial’, such was the newness of the former word at the time.
Anybody wo hasn’t got a vague idea of what racism, at least in the Indigenous context, means today in OZ, hasn’t been reading the newspapers, or has been skipping some of the more informed discussions.
Now, as to the point addressed by tigtog,
My view is you doen’t have to mean to be racist. You either choose to behave in a racist way or not. Its a pretty easy choice to make. You are either a stupid, prejudiced git, or you ain’t, and if your own moral sense doesn’t tell you you’re being racist, either you’re upbringing/education (these days) is stuffed or you need a brain transplant.
For those very few of you who can’t work out what racism is or does to people, read this:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/real-people-affected-by-racist-taunts-20100617-yjkh.html
For those very few of you who can’t work out what racism is or does to people, read this:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/real-people-affected-by-racist-taunts-20100617-yjkh.html
Brian
Jun 18th, 2010 at 1:56 pm
“you have a right to an opinion on how Tahu should have acted, but you seem to be saying that Tahu acted incorrectly. That isn’t your right to decide.”
not sure what you saying here Brian Its my opinion Tahu should hav done what Tallis said
…and IF that failed to get a satisfactory response from Andrew Johns , then Tahu had his own choice to make (play or withdrew) , and either way later go public saying why (and saying he gav Andrew Johns opportunity to accept his coments had clear racail offense & that in responses Johns had refused to accept this)
Tahu could hav chosen this choice , but he chose not to I think it was ill judged , but understand it a instinct natural reaction
BUT none of this mitigates that Johns remarks were disgusting in any event ! and yes Brian th system soetimess seems to rember my Name & stuff details and other times he doesnn’t , so typo-ed name in error
TIGTOG
Ron: ‘My views and Gordon Tallis’s identical’
“Tallis says that Tahu was right to do what he did, and you say that he wasn’t. How is that identical? ”
because I understand Tallis said HE wuld in same situaton approached Johns direct , but that Tahu had right to do as he chose Which IS my view (even though I disagre with Tahu’s choice of decision)
TIGTOG “Whether he is knowingly racist or not is very much a secondary issue.”
Ron:”that misses underlinying issue here , it is th KEY issue and is not a secondary one”
TIGTOG in reply “My point is that it is perfectly possible for people who do not consider themselves racist, who genuinely do have friends of other races and who work respectfully and productively with colleagues of other races, and who genuinely do not intend to personally offend those people in any way, to nonetheless regularly hurt people of other races by uttering words which are racist slurs in the mistaken belief that it doesn’t matter if you’re all mates having a joke. People of genuine goodwill are generally horrified when they realise the hurt that they have unwittingly caused over the years, and decide to do better in future.”
and that WAS my point about both Andrew Johns personaly , and whole Rugby culture of lingo environmnt…which is why it is not a secondary issue but primes ones , needing eduction , under ARL (although ARL seems slow
Brian
Jun 18th, 2010 at 1:56 pm
“you have a right to an opinion on how Tahu should have acted, but you seem to be saying that Tahu acted incorrectly. That isn’t your right to decide.”
not sure what you saying here Brian Its my opinion Tahu should hav done what Tallis said
…and IF that failed to get a satisfactory response from Andrew Johns , then Tahu had his own choice to make (play or withdrew) , and either way later go public saying why (and saying he gav Andrew Johns opportunity to accept his coments had clear racail offense & that in responses Johns had refused to accept this)
Tahu could hav chosen this choice , but he chose not to I think it was ill judged , but understand it a instinct natural reaction
BUT none of this mitigates that Johns remarks were disgusting in any event ! and yes Brian th system soetimess seems to rember my Name & stuff details and other times he doesnn’t , so typo-ed name in error
TIGTOG
Ron: ‘My views and Gordon Tallis’s identical’
“Tallis says that Tahu was right to do what he did, and you say that he wasn’t. How is that identical? ”
because I understand Tallis said HE wuld in same situaton approached Johns direct , but that Tahu had right to do as he chose Which IS my view (even though I disagre with Tahu’s choice of decision)
TIGTOG “Whether he is knowingly racist or not is very much a secondary issue.”
Ron:”that misses underlinying issue here , it is th KEY issue and is not a secondary one”
TIGTOG in reply “My point is that it is perfectly possible for people who do not consider themselves racist, who genuinely do have friends of other races and who work respectfully and productively with colleagues of other races, and who genuinely do not intend to personally offend those people in any way, to nonetheless regularly hurt people of other races by uttering words which are racist slurs in the mistaken belief that it doesn’t matter if you’re all mates having a joke. People of genuine goodwill are generally horrified when they realise the hurt that they have unwittingly caused over the years, and decide to do better in future.”
and that WAS my point about both Andrew Johns personaly , and whole Rugby culture of lingo environmnt…which is why it is not a secondary issue but primes ones , needing eduction , under ARL (although ARL seems slow
It seems to me that Tahu handled himself well, and I have more respect for him (as a public figure) as a consequence of how he has behaved and spoken through all of this than I would otherwise have (my respect for rugby league players as public figures being by default quite low).
He’s also shown that sport can be an effective environment for debating and confronting important issues. And he’s given Johns a good public kicking, which the whole world would have enjoyed, as far as I can see.
That said, I do feel sorry for anyone who gets caught in these media frenzies about correct behaviour, regardless of what they did. I reckon there’s a level of pressure involved in these situations that ordinary people watching them (and salaciously enjoying them) cannot begin to comprehend. I’m pretty sure that Johns’s behaviour wasn’t an isolated incident and he deserved to be stomped over it, but even so it must be hard to be being told by the whole world that you’re a bad, bad person, so very publicly. In any other workplace, this would have been a complaint to the boss, a good head-kicking, an apology and back to work. When we mere mortals say or do stupid nasty things we don’t get our behaviour handled in public in this way, and I for one am glad I’m not in his position…
But anyway well done Tahu!
It seems to me that Tahu handled himself well, and I have more respect for him (as a public figure) as a consequence of how he has behaved and spoken through all of this than I would otherwise have (my respect for rugby league players as public figures being by default quite low).
He’s also shown that sport can be an effective environment for debating and confronting important issues. And he’s given Johns a good public kicking, which the whole world would have enjoyed, as far as I can see.
That said, I do feel sorry for anyone who gets caught in these media frenzies about correct behaviour, regardless of what they did. I reckon there’s a level of pressure involved in these situations that ordinary people watching them (and salaciously enjoying them) cannot begin to comprehend. I’m pretty sure that Johns’s behaviour wasn’t an isolated incident and he deserved to be stomped over it, but even so it must be hard to be being told by the whole world that you’re a bad, bad person, so very publicly. In any other workplace, this would have been a complaint to the boss, a good head-kicking, an apology and back to work. When we mere mortals say or do stupid nasty things we don’t get our behaviour handled in public in this way, and I for one am glad I’m not in his position…
But anyway well done Tahu!
Very few people have done more to help the indigenous football cause than Mal Brown. Michael Long and Gilbert McAdam might be the only two people.
He did however tell a racist joke. I guess he hates all aboriginal people.
Very few people have done more to help the indigenous football cause than Mal Brown. Michael Long and Gilbert McAdam might be the only two people.
He did however tell a racist joke. I guess he hates all aboriginal people.
PC@157:
If Johns didn’t mean his comments to be offensive, then clearly he doesn’t hold the belief in the racist meaning of the word and therefore doesn’t match the definition of racist. Unless you’ve made up your own meaning for the word, at which points its curious that you’re wondering why others don’t know and use your particular meaning of the word.
PC@157:
If Johns didn’t mean his comments to be offensive, then clearly he doesn’t hold the belief in the racist meaning of the word and therefore doesn’t match the definition of racist. Unless you’ve made up your own meaning for the word, at which points its curious that you’re wondering why others don’t know and use your particular meaning of the word.
@Yobbo:
Nope, read the thread. He’s ignorant about how “just mucking around” doesn’t magically make the slur that some words carry as historical freight just disappear.
@Yobbo:
Nope, read the thread. He’s ignorant about how “just mucking around” doesn’t magically make the slur that some words carry as historical freight just disappear.
Paul @160 There are also some very good social health studies demonstrating large gaps in health outcomes between people who experience racism and those who don’t. This association holds after controlling for education, wealth and other factos that affect health like diet and exercise.
Paul @160 There are also some very good social health studies demonstrating large gaps in health outcomes between people who experience racism and those who don’t. This association holds after controlling for education, wealth and other factos that affect health like diet and exercise.
@desipis, that’s rubbish. The Australian tradition of sledging in sport is all about using words that are known to be offensive in a way that is “just a joke” to your own team and deliberately designed to outrage and provoke the opposing team. There is no way that the term “black c*nt” is not perfectly well understood as racist abuse, a word known to be offensive precisely because it is a racist slur, that’s the whole point of using it as a sledge.
The unexamined assumption in this tradition of sledging is that people on your own team, or your supporters in the stands, understand that somehow acting exactly like a racist doesn’t really count because it’s just part of the game. Another unexamined question is what happens to your thinking if you act exactly like a racist on an everyday basis because that’s just part of the game?
Johns didn’t think the offensive nature of these terms of abuse mattered when it was just him sledging the opposition with his own team. He’s now learnt how ignorant that was.
@desipis, that’s rubbish. The Australian tradition of sledging in sport is all about using words that are known to be offensive in a way that is “just a joke” to your own team and deliberately designed to outrage and provoke the opposing team. There is no way that the term “black c*nt” is not perfectly well understood as racist abuse, a word known to be offensive precisely because it is a racist slur, that’s the whole point of using it as a sledge.
The unexamined assumption in this tradition of sledging is that people on your own team, or your supporters in the stands, understand that somehow acting exactly like a racist doesn’t really count because it’s just part of the game. Another unexamined question is what happens to your thinking if you act exactly like a racist on an everyday basis because that’s just part of the game?
Johns didn’t think the offensive nature of these terms of abuse mattered when it was just him sledging the opposition with his own team. He’s now learnt how ignorant that was.
Also “black c*nt” is exactly the same phrase Darren Lehman used against Sri Lanka in the 2008 Test. There’s only one understanding.
Also “black c*nt” is exactly the same phrase Darren Lehman used against Sri Lanka in the 2008 Test. There’s only one understanding.
tigtog,
Terms that are currently or historically used in a derogatory way (including the terms Johns used) can and are used in ways that differ from the derogatory interpretation. Just because you (or even a majority) see it as only holding the offensive meaning doesn’t mean every does.
“Acting like a racist” is very different to being a racist, as long as the racist behaviour ends at the end of the game/joke/etc. Obviously any sort of behaviour that bothers a team mate needs examining, but I don’t think you can make any universal rules to apply to all groups or all people.
The impact of repeated “acting” is something that the individual may need to consider, but again its not something that a universal judgement can be made about. Do we worry that professional actors might get confused about who they really are, or that judges might become indifferent to their personal family situation because they have to be impartial all day, to the extent that we consider stopping anyone from doing those jobs?
I don’t think Johns’ ignorance was of the general perception of the use of the terms, but rather a misjudgement of his team mates sensitivity to their use.
tigtog,
Terms that are currently or historically used in a derogatory way (including the terms Johns used) can and are used in ways that differ from the derogatory interpretation. Just because you (or even a majority) see it as only holding the offensive meaning doesn’t mean every does.
“Acting like a racist” is very different to being a racist, as long as the racist behaviour ends at the end of the game/joke/etc. Obviously any sort of behaviour that bothers a team mate needs examining, but I don’t think you can make any universal rules to apply to all groups or all people.
The impact of repeated “acting” is something that the individual may need to consider, but again its not something that a universal judgement can be made about. Do we worry that professional actors might get confused about who they really are, or that judges might become indifferent to their personal family situation because they have to be impartial all day, to the extent that we consider stopping anyone from doing those jobs?
I don’t think Johns’ ignorance was of the general perception of the use of the terms, but rather a misjudgement of his team mates sensitivity to their use.
tigtog@152
What Tahu did “wrong”, was to let down the NSW team and fans after making a commitment to them. Whether its actually judged as wrong depends on a judgement of the harm of the use of the terms, the other options available to him and the importance of the game.
tigtog@152
What Tahu did “wrong”, was to let down the NSW team and fans after making a commitment to them. Whether its actually judged as wrong depends on a judgement of the harm of the use of the terms, the other options available to him and the importance of the game.
I agree with yobbo. I always ask nicely before I f*k a b*tch, and when I’m employing people I don’t hold it against them if they’ve got a c**t. I mean, some employees can be okay even though they’re chicks. What’s the problem with my attitude? I’ve been a friend of the b****es all my life, I even hold doors for them if they’re pretty.
I dunno why some uppity b**tches think I’ve got an attitude just because I lark around a bit. Ungrateful, if you ask me.
I agree with yobbo. I always ask nicely before I f*k a b*tch, and when I’m employing people I don’t hold it against them if they’ve got a c**t. I mean, some employees can be okay even though they’re chicks. What’s the problem with my attitude? I’ve been a friend of the b****es all my life, I even hold doors for them if they’re pretty.
I dunno why some uppity b**tches think I’ve got an attitude just because I lark around a bit. Ungrateful, if you ask me.
I suppose I should put tags around that, just so it’s clear to yobbo what I’m trying to say there.
I suppose I should put tags around that, just so it’s clear to yobbo what I’m trying to say there.
Shorter Desipsis: Humpty Dumpty assures me that words mean whatever I want them to mean; and if it walks and talks and quacks like a duck, it’s not a duck, it’s a goose.
Shorter Desipsis: Humpty Dumpty assures me that words mean whatever I want them to mean; and if it walks and talks and quacks like a duck, it’s not a duck, it’s a goose.
I’m not the one insisting that words must mean whatever I want them to mean. I’m arguing against that point; it’s others who are claiming that the words must mean what they want them to mean even when they aren’t part of the conversation.
I’m saying if a parrot learns to quack like a duck, calling it a duck is a bit of a stretch.
I’m not the one insisting that words must mean whatever I want them to mean. I’m arguing against that point; it’s others who are claiming that the words must mean what they want them to mean even when they aren’t part of the conversation.
I’m saying if a parrot learns to quack like a duck, calling it a duck is a bit of a stretch.
It’s about more than just the effect on a team mate. This sends a message to the kids in every school and the workers in every industry that their indigenous peers should just smile and nod if they repeat those same terms of abuse “jokingly”, because “they don’t really mean it”. The negative effect on those indigenous people far removed from the playing field, of the abuse that is not just tolerated by actively encouraged on the playing field, is what really matters here. Real people off-field are affected by these racist taunts. Indigenous people all over the country have seen, with pride and appreciation, one of their own stand up and say this is not acceptable; then they’ve seen, with disappointed resignation to business as usual, many of their non-indigenous peers leap in to tell them that such taunts bloody well are acceptable and they should all just harden the f*ck up. Why should they?
You’re really reaching now. Actors have scripts that literally put words in their mouths, rarely keep on playing the same character saying the same words day after day, and over-examine every single syllable that they utter, not just for simple meaning but for emotional weight and connotational/denotational nuance. Judges have a rigorous process of ethical procedures underlying their adoption of a neutral persona imbued with professional impartiality which also form highly examined modes of behaviour that endeavour to strip all emotional weight from what they say. By contrast, people acting out in groups (on-field or off) to conform to expected social roles are improvising around a long-ago-acculturated and subsequently unexamined theme – it’s a numinous, tribal experience – there’s scarcely any overlap between these three situations.
That stuff is simply the epic myth-making of the team sports narrative, desipis. It’s a fantasy designed to sell tickets to the punters. It’s not like there weren’t plenty of other players who could fill his position, and it’s not like he was going to be a match-winner. NSW was always going to lose this one. I’m sure he knows that there are some RL officials and fans who are going to want to punish him for this anyway, and he obviously feels that taking the stand is worth paying the price. I find that admirable.
It’s about more than just the effect on a team mate. This sends a message to the kids in every school and the workers in every industry that their indigenous peers should just smile and nod if they repeat those same terms of abuse “jokingly”, because “they don’t really mean it”. The negative effect on those indigenous people far removed from the playing field, of the abuse that is not just tolerated by actively encouraged on the playing field, is what really matters here. Real people off-field are affected by these racist taunts. Indigenous people all over the country have seen, with pride and appreciation, one of their own stand up and say this is not acceptable; then they’ve seen, with disappointed resignation to business as usual, many of their non-indigenous peers leap in to tell them that such taunts bloody well are acceptable and they should all just harden the f*ck up. Why should they?
You’re really reaching now. Actors have scripts that literally put words in their mouths, rarely keep on playing the same character saying the same words day after day, and over-examine every single syllable that they utter, not just for simple meaning but for emotional weight and connotational/denotational nuance. Judges have a rigorous process of ethical procedures underlying their adoption of a neutral persona imbued with professional impartiality which also form highly examined modes of behaviour that endeavour to strip all emotional weight from what they say. By contrast, people acting out in groups (on-field or off) to conform to expected social roles are improvising around a long-ago-acculturated and subsequently unexamined theme – it’s a numinous, tribal experience – there’s scarcely any overlap between these three situations.
That stuff is simply the epic myth-making of the team sports narrative, desipis. It’s a fantasy designed to sell tickets to the punters. It’s not like there weren’t plenty of other players who could fill his position, and it’s not like he was going to be a match-winner. NSW was always going to lose this one. I’m sure he knows that there are some RL officials and fans who are going to want to punish him for this anyway, and he obviously feels that taking the stand is worth paying the price. I find that admirable.
You’re saying, then, that football is more important than combating racism.
The Default Humans can look mighty silly when they criticise the non-default Humans for “overreacting” or not having “perspective” when they protest about attitudes that have serious impacts on their life and earning capacity, yet get in an almight tizz themselves when an activity consisting of carrying and kicking a leather bladder around a field is threatened. Hmmmm! Perspective anyone?
You’re saying, then, that football is more important than combating racism.
The Default Humans can look mighty silly when they criticise the non-default Humans for “overreacting” or not having “perspective” when they protest about attitudes that have serious impacts on their life and earning capacity, yet get in an almight tizz themselves when an activity consisting of carrying and kicking a leather bladder around a field is threatened. Hmmmm! Perspective anyone?
And I apologise to all the awesome leather bladder-loving netizens who I know read/comment here, hey you’ve got the Round Ball World cup to keep you busy, anyway!
And I apologise to all the awesome leather bladder-loving netizens who I know read/comment here, hey you’ve got the Round Ball World cup to keep you busy, anyway!
I disagree that the message is that they need to like it or not express upset about it, if anything its that they need to tolerate it. I also disagree that any such interpretation is Johns’ fault. As I commented earlier, the misinterpretation would be the fault of the one doing the misinterpretation. The people seeing it as condoning using the terms in other contexts would be the ones at fault.
At the risk of getting a little bit off topic, the burqa is seen as offensive by a large portion of the Australian population. One of the main arguments made on LP is that the burqa is “bloody well acceptable and they should all just harden the f*ck up”. Sledging (including racial and other non PC terms) is an important part of the culture of a minority of people, why should they have to give that up just because it offends someone else?
Team sports are a great way to develop team skills not just useful in sport but all areas of life. Quitting a team you’ve made a commitment to hurts the team and anyone who is depending on or hoping for team success. Sending the message that you can just abandon the commitments you’ve made to people because you don’t like how things are being run is not a good message. Learning to work together in spite of disagreements and keeping commitments made to each other form the foundation of just about every organisation in our society.
Given the lack of information about the environment in the NSW training camp, and the other options explored or considered by Tahu I’d see it as a stretch to make a judgement either way and so don’t think either one should be condemn.
I disagree that the message is that they need to like it or not express upset about it, if anything its that they need to tolerate it. I also disagree that any such interpretation is Johns’ fault. As I commented earlier, the misinterpretation would be the fault of the one doing the misinterpretation. The people seeing it as condoning using the terms in other contexts would be the ones at fault.
At the risk of getting a little bit off topic, the burqa is seen as offensive by a large portion of the Australian population. One of the main arguments made on LP is that the burqa is “bloody well acceptable and they should all just harden the f*ck up”. Sledging (including racial and other non PC terms) is an important part of the culture of a minority of people, why should they have to give that up just because it offends someone else?
Team sports are a great way to develop team skills not just useful in sport but all areas of life. Quitting a team you’ve made a commitment to hurts the team and anyone who is depending on or hoping for team success. Sending the message that you can just abandon the commitments you’ve made to people because you don’t like how things are being run is not a good message. Learning to work together in spite of disagreements and keeping commitments made to each other form the foundation of just about every organisation in our society.
Given the lack of information about the environment in the NSW training camp, and the other options explored or considered by Tahu I’d see it as a stretch to make a judgement either way and so don’t think either one should be condemn.
“Sledging (including racial and other non PC terms) is an important part of the culture of a minority of people, why should they have to give that up just because it offends someone else?”
The whole point of sledging is that it offends someone else. It’s not incidental.
“Quitting a team you’ve made a commitment to hurts the team and anyone who is depending on or hoping for team success.”
You know what else hurts the team?
Racist cunts on the coaching staff, that’s what.
“Sledging (including racial and other non PC terms) is an important part of the culture of a minority of people, why should they have to give that up just because it offends someone else?”
The whole point of sledging is that it offends someone else. It’s not incidental.
“Quitting a team you’ve made a commitment to hurts the team and anyone who is depending on or hoping for team success.”
You know what else hurts the team?
Racist cunts on the coaching staff, that’s what.
Fran, I’ve just unapproved your comment purely because it is too much of a derail. You should be able to still see it on the page as “awaiting moderation” – can you cut and paste it into the Saturday Salon thread please?
Fran, I’ve just unapproved your comment purely because it is too much of a derail. You should be able to still see it on the page as “awaiting moderation” – can you cut and paste it into the Saturday Salon thread please?
Was it something I said?
When will these thin-skinned auto-moderation-bots learn to just toughen up?
Was it something I said?
When will these thin-skinned auto-moderation-bots learn to just toughen up?
Gees, you talk rubbish Desipis. What is the purpose of sledging? It’s done to upset the opposition player so much that they go off their game. Plainly, it’s meant to be distressing or there’s no point to it. Plainly, Tahu was also distressed in this situation and made the judgement call that somethings are more important than rugby. It’s his workplace after all. Do you think it would be allright for a boss to call an employee a ‘black c**t’ in all workplaces? Claiming, ‘It’s only a game’, ‘it’s only a joke’ is ridiculous. People like Long and Winmar have made it clear that historically such treatment has stopped indigenous players’ success. That’s why they took a stand.
I consider myself not to be racist, but I know I’m fully capable of making racist judgments in certain situations because we live in a racist culture and it’s impossible not to imbibe it to some extent.
One counter-intuitive example is in an article by Adam Goodes in which he wrote about the common claim that Indigenous AFL players have some sort of second sense that allows them to be brilliant at the game, summed up in the phrase ‘black magic’. No, he said, there’s nothing magical about it. It comes from hard work and self-sacrifice. But of course, that cuts against the stereotype of lazy blackfellas. See how racism can work in an insidious way? Claiming that something isn’t racist because I claim it isn’t, when indigenous players are saying ‘oh yes it is’, defies all logic.
Gees, you talk rubbish Desipis. What is the purpose of sledging? It’s done to upset the opposition player so much that they go off their game. Plainly, it’s meant to be distressing or there’s no point to it. Plainly, Tahu was also distressed in this situation and made the judgement call that somethings are more important than rugby. It’s his workplace after all. Do you think it would be allright for a boss to call an employee a ‘black c**t’ in all workplaces? Claiming, ‘It’s only a game’, ‘it’s only a joke’ is ridiculous. People like Long and Winmar have made it clear that historically such treatment has stopped indigenous players’ success. That’s why they took a stand.
I consider myself not to be racist, but I know I’m fully capable of making racist judgments in certain situations because we live in a racist culture and it’s impossible not to imbibe it to some extent.
One counter-intuitive example is in an article by Adam Goodes in which he wrote about the common claim that Indigenous AFL players have some sort of second sense that allows them to be brilliant at the game, summed up in the phrase ‘black magic’. No, he said, there’s nothing magical about it. It comes from hard work and self-sacrifice. But of course, that cuts against the stereotype of lazy blackfellas. See how racism can work in an insidious way? Claiming that something isn’t racist because I claim it isn’t, when indigenous players are saying ‘oh yes it is’, defies all logic.
Helen@176,
If you’d read the full comment I was saying “football is important” not “football is more important than combating racism”. Of course I’m sure some people think that “some football games are more important than combating everything that even seems like racism.”
Helen@176,
If you’d read the full comment I was saying “football is important” not “football is more important than combating racism”. Of course I’m sure some people think that “some football games are more important than combating everything that even seems like racism.”
Done TigTog. I thought you might so I wanted to give you a heads up. I will repost in Saturday Salon. By all means delete the post here.
Done TigTog. I thought you might so I wanted to give you a heads up. I will repost in Saturday Salon. By all means delete the post here.
(Desipis 178)
Why should they tolerate it? What special privilege do white people have that they get to force everyone else to tolerate their bad behaviour?
(Desipis 178)
Why should they tolerate it? What special privilege do white people have that they get to force everyone else to tolerate their bad behaviour?
“One counter-intuitive example is in an article by Adam Goodes in which he wrote about the common claim that Indigenous AFL players have some sort of second sense that allows them to be brilliant at the game, summed up in the phrase ‘black magic’. No, he said, there’s nothing magical about it. It comes from hard work and self-sacrifice. But of course, that cuts against the stereotype of lazy blackfellas. See how racism can work in an insidious way? Claiming that something isn’t racist because I claim it isn’t, when indigenous players are saying ‘oh yes it is’, defies all logic.”
I’ve always assumed it was just that only the most determined and thick-skinned Indigenous players had the resolve to tough it out through all the racism, and only the most naturally gifted got any support in that from their clubs, so only the very cream of Indigenous players forge a meaningful career. Whereas Joe Whitey has a much better chance of getting somewhere on smarts and training with only moderate talent.
“One counter-intuitive example is in an article by Adam Goodes in which he wrote about the common claim that Indigenous AFL players have some sort of second sense that allows them to be brilliant at the game, summed up in the phrase ‘black magic’. No, he said, there’s nothing magical about it. It comes from hard work and self-sacrifice. But of course, that cuts against the stereotype of lazy blackfellas. See how racism can work in an insidious way? Claiming that something isn’t racist because I claim it isn’t, when indigenous players are saying ‘oh yes it is’, defies all logic.”
I’ve always assumed it was just that only the most determined and thick-skinned Indigenous players had the resolve to tough it out through all the racism, and only the most naturally gifted got any support in that from their clubs, so only the very cream of Indigenous players forge a meaningful career. Whereas Joe Whitey has a much better chance of getting somewhere on smarts and training with only moderate talent.
Ignorance lies at the heart of ‘innocent’ racist gibes | SEAN GORMAN, June 18, 2010
Ignorance lies at the heart of ‘innocent’ racist gibes | SEAN GORMAN, June 18, 2010
Fine,
There were no opposition around at the time, so it wasn’t about putting the opposition off their game, rather motivating their team to focus on a common enemy. Clearly, given the reaction of his audience, Johns’ judgement on how to do this was lacking. And I haven’t been criticising Tahu’s judgement.
No, that’s not what I’m saying. Straw-man.
Why? Why is the combination of letters, or the sounds coming from a mouth the problem and not the meaning behind them?
Fine,
There were no opposition around at the time, so it wasn’t about putting the opposition off their game, rather motivating their team to focus on a common enemy. Clearly, given the reaction of his audience, Johns’ judgement on how to do this was lacking. And I haven’t been criticising Tahu’s judgement.
No, that’s not what I’m saying. Straw-man.
Why? Why is the combination of letters, or the sounds coming from a mouth the problem and not the meaning behind them?
None. There are plenty of things people from other races/cultures do that I consider bad behaviour. However I tolerate it because it’s their culture and I can’t expect others to conform to my standards. All I expect is that white/male/football players/etc get the same cultural freedom.
None. There are plenty of things people from other races/cultures do that I consider bad behaviour. However I tolerate it because it’s their culture and I can’t expect others to conform to my standards. All I expect is that white/male/football players/etc get the same cultural freedom.
I very much like the ideas in this grab from Anna Haebich’s book in relation to Ignorance and how we must all work to not only develop an epistemology of knowing but also one of ignorance – how ignorance is not a passive state but a condition which is as actively produced as knowledge is:
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=ztUWQu7OjUAC&pg=PA103&lpg=PA103&dq=anna+haebich+ignorance&source=bl&ots=hFbpXB9xZX&sig=cMuwS-Si0plSpBvxfCI4MraJMyc&hl=en&ei=Pz4bTKWuAoqgkQXVkaysDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false
It’s an excellent book but this concept is important. How is ignorance actively maintained? And whose interests is ignorance and “not knowing the consequences” serving?
I very much like the ideas in this grab from Anna Haebich’s book in relation to Ignorance and how we must all work to not only develop an epistemology of knowing but also one of ignorance – how ignorance is not a passive state but a condition which is as actively produced as knowledge is:
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=ztUWQu7OjUAC&pg=PA103&lpg=PA103&dq=anna+haebich+ignorance&source=bl&ots=hFbpXB9xZX&sig=cMuwS-Si0plSpBvxfCI4MraJMyc&hl=en&ei=Pz4bTKWuAoqgkQXVkaysDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false
It’s an excellent book but this concept is important. How is ignorance actively maintained? And whose interests is ignorance and “not knowing the consequences” serving?
Being racist is white Australian culture and should be tolerated? What a complete load of bollocks.
Being racist is white Australian culture and should be tolerated? What a complete load of bollocks.
Do you think it would be allright for a boss to call an employee a ‘black c**t’ in all workplaces?
As explained above by someone else, the entire point of sledging is that it’s supposed to piss people off and make them perform worse as a result. Using it on your own employees seems a bit counter-productive.
One counter-intuitive example is in an article by Adam Goodes in which he wrote about the common claim that Indigenous AFL players have some sort of second sense that allows them to be brilliant at the game, summed up in the phrase ‘black magic’. No, he said, there’s nothing magical about it. It comes from hard work and self-sacrifice. But of course, that cuts against the stereotype of lazy blackfellas.
Lumping everyone of the same race together in a positive way is also racism.
Adam Goodes made it to the AFL because of hard work and sacrifice. The same is true of a lot of aboriginal players.
That doesn’t mean the same is true for someone like Daniel Motlop or Jeff Farmer who made it to the AFL in spite of their laziness and bad attitude, because they were extremely gifted. That’s the sort of player who inspired the black magic/silky skills stereotype.
Of course there are white players in the same boat too, e.g. Steve Johnson.
Do you think it would be allright for a boss to call an employee a ‘black c**t’ in all workplaces?
As explained above by someone else, the entire point of sledging is that it’s supposed to piss people off and make them perform worse as a result. Using it on your own employees seems a bit counter-productive.
One counter-intuitive example is in an article by Adam Goodes in which he wrote about the common claim that Indigenous AFL players have some sort of second sense that allows them to be brilliant at the game, summed up in the phrase ‘black magic’. No, he said, there’s nothing magical about it. It comes from hard work and self-sacrifice. But of course, that cuts against the stereotype of lazy blackfellas.
Lumping everyone of the same race together in a positive way is also racism.
Adam Goodes made it to the AFL because of hard work and sacrifice. The same is true of a lot of aboriginal players.
That doesn’t mean the same is true for someone like Daniel Motlop or Jeff Farmer who made it to the AFL in spite of their laziness and bad attitude, because they were extremely gifted. That’s the sort of player who inspired the black magic/silky skills stereotype.
Of course there are white players in the same boat too, e.g. Steve Johnson.
Yes, Mindy that’s what Desipis’s argument comes down to.
Yes, Mindy that’s what Desipis’s argument comes down to.
@Desipis, you’re arguing in bad faith employing cynical rhetorical tricks of assorted strawmen and apples and oranges analogies. (surprised, not)
Those who want women barred from wearing burquas are asking for an exemption from the usual community standard: that of people wearing what they want to wear (within workplace regulations) so long as they don’t bare too much skin. That’s why their demands are met with disgust by progressives; asking for these women to be treated differently constitutes the imposition of a special burden.
The usual standard in the community is that racial vilification is not acceptable. To ask sports players to adhere to this standard is not imposing a special burden. For rugby to ask for an exemption simply because they are used to being exempt is what constitutes a special burden.
In both cases the “cultural freedom” being asked for is that minorities have to adjust to the majority, just because, in matters that are supposed to be no big deal but are in actuality defended vigorously by the majority. In both cases that particular “cultural freedom” is oppressive.
@Desipis, you’re arguing in bad faith employing cynical rhetorical tricks of assorted strawmen and apples and oranges analogies. (surprised, not)
Those who want women barred from wearing burquas are asking for an exemption from the usual community standard: that of people wearing what they want to wear (within workplace regulations) so long as they don’t bare too much skin. That’s why their demands are met with disgust by progressives; asking for these women to be treated differently constitutes the imposition of a special burden.
The usual standard in the community is that racial vilification is not acceptable. To ask sports players to adhere to this standard is not imposing a special burden. For rugby to ask for an exemption simply because they are used to being exempt is what constitutes a special burden.
In both cases the “cultural freedom” being asked for is that minorities have to adjust to the majority, just because, in matters that are supposed to be no big deal but are in actuality defended vigorously by the majority. In both cases that particular “cultural freedom” is oppressive.
This whole Johns thingy was just a publicity stunt to get the State of Origin on to the front pages of the newspapers and in the broadcast media. Tahu would have been in on it. He just had to feign indignation and act the way he did. Johns just had to play the bad guy. He is used to playing the role of a clown.
This whole Johns thingy was just a publicity stunt to get the State of Origin on to the front pages of the newspapers and in the broadcast media. Tahu would have been in on it. He just had to feign indignation and act the way he did. Johns just had to play the bad guy. He is used to playing the role of a clown.
Mindy:
No, using offensive language is part of the (sub)culture.
tigtog:
I’m not arguing in bad faith. The community standard being violated by the burqa is that people show their faces to each other and make eye contact when talking to each other. I don’t see exception to that community standard is any different for that of language. Particularly that given we’re talking about the context of a private football training session it’s the equivalent of demanding muslim women don’t were burqas at a mosque.
Tahu’s response makes it clear that in this particular instance it probably wasn’t appropriate language, but I disagree with the notion that people should never be allowed to use such terms.
Mindy:
No, using offensive language is part of the (sub)culture.
tigtog:
I’m not arguing in bad faith. The community standard being violated by the burqa is that people show their faces to each other and make eye contact when talking to each other. I don’t see exception to that community standard is any different for that of language. Particularly that given we’re talking about the context of a private football training session it’s the equivalent of demanding muslim women don’t were burqas at a mosque.
Tahu’s response makes it clear that in this particular instance it probably wasn’t appropriate language, but I disagree with the notion that people should never be allowed to use such terms.
I’m always profoundly disappointed in these debates by the sheer number of people who think that bad behaviour and being impolite is defensible in these circumstances.
Really, desipis, it’s possible to be a good sportsman without abusing your opponents. I’ve trained with lots of kickboxing fighters and I’ve never, ever met one whose approach to his opponent was “I’m gonna smash that [insert race] [insert gender-based epiphet].” The abuse is entirely optional. It’s a culture no-one needs based on racism and anger, and it can just be dumped. You’re defending something that is literally worthless.
I’m always profoundly disappointed in these debates by the sheer number of people who think that bad behaviour and being impolite is defensible in these circumstances.
Really, desipis, it’s possible to be a good sportsman without abusing your opponents. I’ve trained with lots of kickboxing fighters and I’ve never, ever met one whose approach to his opponent was “I’m gonna smash that [insert race] [insert gender-based epiphet].” The abuse is entirely optional. It’s a culture no-one needs based on racism and anger, and it can just be dumped. You’re defending something that is literally worthless.
And here we get to the crux of the problem. People are willing to oppress and destroy cultures they don’t like. Things are still no different from back in colonial times, they’re just dressed up in intellectual arguments a little better.
Football is based on violence. I guess we don’t need that either.
I’ve never argued it was needed, just that the people involved are the ones to make that choice.
The “something” I’m defending is part of peoples lives; it’s part of peoples identities. You’re asking people to sacrifice part of themselves, part of what bonds them to others in those communities based solely on the fact that you don’t like it.
And here we get to the crux of the problem. People are willing to oppress and destroy cultures they don’t like. Things are still no different from back in colonial times, they’re just dressed up in intellectual arguments a little better.
Football is based on violence. I guess we don’t need that either.
I’ve never argued it was needed, just that the people involved are the ones to make that choice.
The “something” I’m defending is part of peoples lives; it’s part of peoples identities. You’re asking people to sacrifice part of themselves, part of what bonds them to others in those communities based solely on the fact that you don’t like it.
Bullshit Desipis. I’m an AFL fan. And racism doesn’t have to be part of that culture. And the AFL recognises that. Racism isn’t a defensible part of any culture and identity.
Bullshit Desipis. I’m an AFL fan. And racism doesn’t have to be part of that culture. And the AFL recognises that. Racism isn’t a defensible part of any culture and identity.
that’s a crock, desipis. Last time I was at an AFL game two middle-aged working class guys behind me maintained a running commentary for the whole game without venturing into a word harsher than bastards. They were sat next to each other, from opposite teams, and they didn’t eat to be angry or racist to have fun. And this “culture” is not a “culture” in the sense you’re using the word.
If football is violent, perhaps you can explain why my kickboxing buddies didn’t need this language. Something to do with all those pansies in the kickboxing world, perhaps? The lack of aggression?
You’re making excuses for bad behaviour. Why bother?
that’s a crock, desipis. Last time I was at an AFL game two middle-aged working class guys behind me maintained a running commentary for the whole game without venturing into a word harsher than bastards. They were sat next to each other, from opposite teams, and they didn’t eat to be angry or racist to have fun. And this “culture” is not a “culture” in the sense you’re using the word.
If football is violent, perhaps you can explain why my kickboxing buddies didn’t need this language. Something to do with all those pansies in the kickboxing world, perhaps? The lack of aggression?
You’re making excuses for bad behaviour. Why bother?
Those here thinking Johns is a racist , better accept they’re accusing th whole elite Rugby community is made up of racists also
And indeed up to 10 years ago better acept that whole AFL were made up of racists as well
Such a view is multiple straw mans , and blogs here show a complete misunderstanding of Rugby League environment lingo (and formally AFL environment as well)
Johns comments cause outrage here as if ONLY Andrew Johns uses such lingo in rugby circles , and thus here he is a racist and assume whole of rest of Rugby people’s lingo is pretty lacking John’s phrases It is a delusion & simplistic view
Furthermore , it confuses this environment traditonal lingo slang with those in society who ar actual racists , which IS an entirely diferent category and who cetainly worthy of contempt
Johns is not a racist , nor is Rugby community , nor indeed prevous AFL comunity…they simply ar/were guilty of education lack of using unknowingly slang lingo hurtful in a racial sense to others that had been regular used for decades , and remedy is education…something AFL has done , mostly success via mediation process with penalities if not comply with
Mention of ‘sledging’ and ‘joking’ in some posts simply red herrings to issue
Those here thinking Johns is a racist , better accept they’re accusing th whole elite Rugby community is made up of racists also
And indeed up to 10 years ago better acept that whole AFL were made up of racists as well
Such a view is multiple straw mans , and blogs here show a complete misunderstanding of Rugby League environment lingo (and formally AFL environment as well)
Johns comments cause outrage here as if ONLY Andrew Johns uses such lingo in rugby circles , and thus here he is a racist and assume whole of rest of Rugby people’s lingo is pretty lacking John’s phrases It is a delusion & simplistic view
Furthermore , it confuses this environment traditonal lingo slang with those in society who ar actual racists , which IS an entirely diferent category and who cetainly worthy of contempt
Johns is not a racist , nor is Rugby community , nor indeed prevous AFL comunity…they simply ar/were guilty of education lack of using unknowingly slang lingo hurtful in a racial sense to others that had been regular used for decades , and remedy is education…something AFL has done , mostly success via mediation process with penalities if not comply with
Mention of ‘sledging’ and ‘joking’ in some posts simply red herrings to issue
Roger of ACT @ 195, that’s bizarre.
Ron @ 147 you keep on saying that Tahu made his decision to withdraw “on spur of moment on instinct”. In fact Johns made the remarks on Wednesday and it was not until Friday after what he said were two sleepless nights that he decided to withdraw from the team.
desipis @ 198:
If you want to put it like that, yes, I would ask some people to sacrifice something that’s part of themselves, not simply because I don’t like it but because it’s hurtful to a group of people within society and does actual harm.
Words do work in the world. The issue is not trivial.
Actually, desipis, from 169 and 170 you wandered into strange territory and are expressing views that I believe should have no part in civilised discourse.
Tigtog has done sterling work and I’d like to pick out Fran for special mention. I think the issue has had a fair airing but I’ll be out a fair bit of tomorrow. I think we could leave it there, so I’m closing the thread. Tigtog, please fell free to re-open it if you so desire.
Before I do I want to highlight a point made by Mick Gooda, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, who said:
I am reminded of Derrida’s essay On Forgiveness where he distinguishes between the perpetrator and the deed. He says that the victim may come to forgive the perpetrator but not the deed, which may be unforgivable.
But mind, it is only the victim who can do the forgiving, according to Derrida.
Roger of ACT @ 195, that’s bizarre.
Ron @ 147 you keep on saying that Tahu made his decision to withdraw “on spur of moment on instinct”. In fact Johns made the remarks on Wednesday and it was not until Friday after what he said were two sleepless nights that he decided to withdraw from the team.
desipis @ 198:
If you want to put it like that, yes, I would ask some people to sacrifice something that’s part of themselves, not simply because I don’t like it but because it’s hurtful to a group of people within society and does actual harm.
Words do work in the world. The issue is not trivial.
Actually, desipis, from 169 and 170 you wandered into strange territory and are expressing views that I believe should have no part in civilised discourse.
Tigtog has done sterling work and I’d like to pick out Fran for special mention. I think the issue has had a fair airing but I’ll be out a fair bit of tomorrow. I think we could leave it there, so I’m closing the thread. Tigtog, please fell free to re-open it if you so desire.
Before I do I want to highlight a point made by Mick Gooda, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, who said:
I am reminded of Derrida’s essay On Forgiveness where he distinguishes between the perpetrator and the deed. He says that the victim may come to forgive the perpetrator but not the deed, which may be unforgivable.
But mind, it is only the victim who can do the forgiving, according to Derrida.